By Spiro Zavos
June 3rd 2009 @ 4:48am
Springboks look to be the strongest Tri-Nations side
South Africa's Frans Steyn chases the ball forward into attack during the Tri Nations Test match between the Australian Wallabies and the South African Springboks played at the Subiaco Oval in Perth, Saturday July 19, 2008. AAP Image/Tony McDonough
The announcement of the Springboks squad to play the British and Irish Lions gives us a chance to compare it with the Wallaby and All Blacks squads. The first impression is that, on paper at least, the Springboks look to be the strongest of the three squads.
By my count, they have eight forwards – Schalk Burger, Bismarck du Plessis, John Smit, Juan Smit, Pierre Spies, Victor Matfield, Bakkies Botha and Gurthro Steenkamp – who, on current form, would be close first choice selections in any national sides.
Five of the backs, too – Jean de Villiers, Fourie du Preez, Jacque Fourie, Bryan Habana, and J.P.Pietersen – would, similarly, enhance any other national squad.
But there are a couple of qualifications that need to be made.
First, the squad lacks a world class first five-eighths.
Ruan Pienaar, a gifted player, is a converted halfback who plays fullback better than he does five-eighths. Francois Steyn has been tried in the position and has played with leaden hands.
Morne Steyn has been excellent this season in the Super 14, but whether he can lift his steady, essentially kicking game to a higher level remains to be seen.
There is no ‘fetcher’ (in South African parlance), or openside breakaway, as played in Australia or New Zealand, in the squad. The selectors seem to have forgotten that the Bulls were able to play more expansively this year because they played fetchers.
Also, a new ruling at the tackle (which allows a tackler to keep his hands on the ball from the time of the tackle, if he stays on his feet) is going to reward players like George Smith and Richie McCaw, who get their hands first on the ball a lot and, in the past, when a ruck is formed are told to “release it.”
Finally, there is the issue of whether coach Peter de Villiers is up to coaching a successful Springboks side.
Given the political imperatives involved, the job is a difficult one. Why, for instance, is Earl Rose in the squad, if not for reasons of political correctness?
Last season, apparently, the senior members of the Springboks squad took over the coaching themselves at the end of the season. But this sort of player-power action generally does not continue to give results.
So the onus is on the coaching staff to get the best of what is a very strong squad, better in the opinion of Victor Matfield than the side that won the 2007 Rugby World Cup.
The All Blacks, at least until Richie McCaw comes back for the Tri-Nations, and without Sitiveni Sivivatu until the November tour presumably, look to be light on great players. The forwards look solid, but without the special qualities the best of the South African pack has.
In the backs, Ma’a Nonu and Mils Muliaina are genuinely world class players.
Joe Rokocoko looks past his best.
There is great talent in Brendon Leonard and Richard Kahui, if they can get over a propensity to get injured a lot. Isaia Toeava is also a tremendous talent and my guess is that he will used on the wing to play the sort of mid-field attacking role that Sivivatu has played.
The New Zealand selectors did pick Isaac Ross, potentially a great second rower in the Colin Meads tradition of running with the ball. They did not select Rene Ranger, who looked to be a new John Kirwan with his size, pace and power. It may be by Tri-Nations time, Ranger will be brought in if he plays well for the NZ A side in the Pacific tournament.
Graham Henry has an 85 per cent winning record with the All Blacks, the second best (after Fred Allen) apparently. If he can maintain this sort of record this season, with players like Dan Carter and McCaw unavailable for some of the Tests, it will be a great coaching achievement.
Matt Giteau sums up the hopes and the dilemma of the current Wallaby squad when he told journalists on Monday that the side will show ‘more hunger’ this season. The days of automatic selection for senior players are over because “Robbie’s for everyone challenging for positions.”
And by everyone, that means Giteau himself.
It would not surprise me if sometime this season Giteau is moved to inside centre and Berrick Barnes is brought in to run the backline.
The Wallabies are short of power in the second row, where James Horwill is coming back from an injury and Nathan Sharpe is coming into the Wallaby squad after being dropped (correctly) at one stage last year. Dean Mumm is the third second rower, although his favoured position is blindside flanker.
That position will be filled by Rocky Elsom, and the Elsom, George Smith, Wycliff Palu backrow is as strong a line as any team could hope to have.
I always like teams selected with a bit of growth in them, and James O’Connor provides that for the Wallabies.
This boy wonder is certain to be a great Wallaby and Deans, by playing him at fullback, is nurturing him the way he did with Carter at the Crusaders.
Like the All Blacks, the point of difference for the Wallabies compared with the Springboks is some new exciting talent and, more importantly, the ability of the coach to create a team that is greater than the sum of its parts.
De Villiers has the players, it seems to me. The inferior Wallaby and All Blacks squads have the superior coaches.
Going to the Waratahs v Brumbies blockbuster at ANZ Stadium, Saturday 24 April? If you're keen to meet up with other Roarers, register you interest and we'll keep you informed on the place to meet. Register now.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
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...
(209)
Knives Out said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:35am | Report comment
‘By my count, they have seven forwards on current form – Schalk Burger, Bismarck du Plessis, John Smit’
What form is that Mr. Zavos?
pothale said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:45am | Report comment
Was at a water-cooler discussion today around some sporting people and work colleagues – a couple of them from the UK. The subject inevitably turned to the Lions tour of South Africa. To a man and woman, the South Africans were highly regarded, following their WC win and the recent ‘walkover’ win of the Bulls in the S14 final against the inept Chiefs. Equally, everyone feared for the chances of the Lions surviving any of the Tests.
Everyone agreed that they would watch each of the matches on the tour, and relished the upcoming matches this week and sitting down for the first Test. Someone commented that it was striking how much the Lions tours in South Africa raised so much interest amongst the NH nations, much more so than against other countries.
I pointed out that the tour in Australia had been well attended and the fans had been well received everywhere they went. It was evidently popular with people. Yes came the response – but watching and visiting South Africa was what most people relished. Some of those present had been on previous tours and in their view South Africa led the way in terms of attraction, landscape, culture people and an indefinable relish for games against the local teams and the Boks.
A quick straw poll amongst the assembled group had South Africa at the top of everyone’s lists as the Lions tour they like the most, – either watching or going on tour – followed by Australia – with New Zealand coming a distant third by those who mentioned it.
I queried this latter point, saying New Zealand were surely the greatest challenge and therefore, would be the most prized scalp to gain for a Lions tour and their supporters. To my surprise, all disagreed, and saw the South Africans as the greatest and most attractive challenge and the scalp most prized given the history of the tours between the two. Whilst the All Blacks were without a good team, they didn’t raise anyone’s hackles or instil the same strength of tribal (if one could use that term about Lions teams) competitiveness or enjoyment.
Yes, the Aussies did have it, they enjoy their rugby and the visiting fans. But the South Africans are the best.
It was just a water-cooler conversation, but an interesting one.
With the Lions tour already deemed a whitewash or at best 1-2 against the Boks amongst most commentators – and fans – in NH and SH, the Tri-Nations will be interesting this year and the Autumn Internationals, for seeing if this will be truly the Year of the Bok.
Knives Out said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:50am | Report comment
Interesting thoughts, Pothale. I would tend to agree. I honestly think that the weather must have something to do with it.
pothale said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:08am | Report comment
Ooh – I could take that up a number of ways.
a) Is he making a subtle reference to the current hot weather causing people to think barmy thoughts?
b) Does he mean my writing?
c) Does he mean the people who had the conversation?
d) Or perhaps he genuinely meant that people prefer the weather in South Africa?
e) Or maybe I have an unhealthy developed sense of paranoia?
Answers on a postcard, please.
Knives Out said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:15am | Report comment
Very good.
If you could stereotype nations then SA is warm, vibrant and full of large jovial Afrikaaners. NZ is dowdy, cold, wet and full of pumpkin soup and people willing to condemn the various technical aspects of European rugby, and Australia is warm, casual and childish and full of irritating press headlines.
So… C.
In broader terms I would suggest that SA has always been considered more beatable than NZ. A visit to NZ tends to result in defeat and bad times. Also, it’s arguable that SA rugby has not changed in donkeys years. The physical challenge is always there, and whilst NZ may present hard players full of skill SA tends to offer kamikaze farmers. People respect the physical – sometimes too physical – challenge.
pothale said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:24am | Report comment
I am not going to Cape Town to watch kamikaze farmers. Shall enjoy the sunshine, people, food, company, and rugby in no particular order. My favourite place to visit. So far…..
Knives Out said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:29am | Report comment
Good for you, sounds cushty. Don’t call an Afrikaans male a kamikaze farmer, at least not to his face. That is a stereotype.
pothale said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:49am | Report comment
I have no intention of doing so.
Anyway back to the plot. Or rather Spiro’s story.
What about those Tri-Nations then? I reckon the Bulls will win it myself – with all those New Zealanders in the back-line, the other countries don’t have a chance of getting through to the next round.
Darryl said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:05am | Report comment
How about Chips and Beans you pretentious wankers?
pothale said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:08am | Report comment
Pretentious?
Wot’s pretentious then Darryl? Do tell.
Jerry said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:30am | Report comment
I’d rather visit South Africa than Australia or New Zealand. Mind you, I’m from New Zealand so it’s not as interesting as a tourist destination. Also, I lived in Aus for two years and have been there a bunch of times.
pothale said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:35am | Report comment
There you go. Case proved.
Would you say the same about the Tri-Nations then, Jerry? You’d prefer it to go to South Africa since you’ve had it so often in New Zealand, and Australia has had it?
Jerry said | June 3rd 2009 @ 8:06am | Report comment
The next 10 years of TN wins have already been decided in the latest SANZAR negotiations. SA will win back to back for the next two years to shore up support (and as a concession to not getting a 6th Super rugby team) followed by 8 straight wins for the Wallabies. That Steve Tew really is a rubbish negotiator.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 8:45am | Report comment
Pothale I.d actually challenge your thinking and even go as far as saying it wasn’t even a discussion but just your own personal view. Also I think KO has got it right the season why your pomie brethren don’t rate coming here is because the just can’t seem to win. The boys from the shakey isles are just too dam good. As for the weather dark and gloomy coming from a Brit thats hysterical
Mr Sports said | June 3rd 2009 @ 9:02am | Report comment
Great column as always Spiro but i do have a couple of queries.
Firstly don’t we assume that Burger will play fetcher for the Boks? Obviously he is best known for his physicality at the breakdown but he will play a similar role to a McCaw or Smith as well.
Secondly you refer to Joe Rokocoko as past his best – the guy is only 25! Clearly he is not playing his best at the moment but i suspect there will be more to come from Big Joe.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 9:13am | Report comment
Burger doesnt really ‘Fetch’ or turnover ball he slows the ball distribution down so that by the time it comes out he can tackle the recipient. Then its rinse and repeat until the opposition cough up the ball or run out of recipients. When he is on song he is a freakish force of nature but at the moment he isnt near his best and I feel a bit like Richie he appears to be in need of a break.
Terry Kidd said | June 3rd 2009 @ 9:14am | Report comment
I agree with reference to the Bok fetcher. When I looked at the squad I immediately thought of Burger. Do you not agree that he will play the fetcher role Spiro?
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 9:16am | Report comment
or shall I say to be better managed to get him back on song without burning him out. I would look to rotate the starting spot between him and Brussouw, from whom I expect big things
JamesB said | June 3rd 2009 @ 9:56am | Report comment
How on earth can the AB’s be described as inferior, they are the reigning Tri-nations champions, and that was after they lost practically a whole team after the RWC 2007. The new players they introduced last season will have considerably more experience and will have grown as players. They are slightly weaker without Carter, but once again it will be decided by the forwards and NZ will be at full strength by the time the Tri-Nations begins. Actually the main factor in SA’s favour is that they play NZ at home twice, though they must play in Australia twice as well, and their record isn’t very good in Australia. It comes down to consistency, and that is where no other nation can match NZ.
Hammer said | June 3rd 2009 @ 10:02am | Report comment
Really don’t know why the Lions tours got a mention here .. but the first thought that came to me when I read that was similar to what KO said …. NZ is just too hard – winning has always been damn near impossible and in the current era probably is … whereas with SA and Aust there’s always a perceived glimmer of hope of a win …
Throw in the warmer weather for people going away on tour …
Back on topic … yeah the boks look stronger than last year … which can only be good for the tri-nations – but how many injuries will they incur between now and at the ens of the Lions tests … and lets not forget that NZ will be blostered by the return of McCaw, So’oalio and McAllister … with Williams and Leonard also getting the opportunity to come back up to speed via restricted game time in these 3 games … Aust look extremely similar to last years squad and have possibly only Elsom to come in …
van der Merwe said | June 3rd 2009 @ 10:10am | Report comment
I cannot believe that Brussouw didn’t make the cut. Selecting three eighthmen (if you count Rossouw) and Juan Smith means that we only have one loose forward known to play towards the ball – Burger (who’s actually a hybrid ball carrier/fetcher). It’s almost as dumb as selecting four wings and no specialized full back, or three looseheads and only one tighthead.
pothale said | June 3rd 2009 @ 10:18am | Report comment
Hemjay – you actually prove my point. As Hammer says as well – SA and Aus are more attractive to people. Live with it, NZ are too good, but your weather is shite. You can’t have everything.
True Tah said | June 3rd 2009 @ 10:18am | Report comment
VDM
Im surprised Brussow didnt make it either, but hopefully he will show the Boks selectors what they are missing when the Lions play the Cheetahs.
Mr Sport – Rokococo may not be past his best, but he is certainly not in form, and there are plenty of better wingers running around in NZ now – his tackle (or lack thereof) on Digby Ioane was embarassing, I know Digby is a bloody strong unit, but at least he could have had a go.
stuff happens said | June 3rd 2009 @ 10:22am | Report comment
Agree with Spiro re the’Boks. I also thought they’d win the TN last season. Ah well! Difference this year may be that for once the ABs have a difficult draw.Big year for Deans too and lots of Tests between now & Christmas.
Agree re Brussouw vdM,hopefully he’ll get his chance if not against the LIons then during the 6N
Hammer said | June 3rd 2009 @ 10:44am | Report comment
Stuff …”difference this year may be that for once the ABs have a difficult draw” .. really ?? go back to the last couple of tri-nations and I think you’ll find NZ have regularly been lumped with a 7 day turn around game having to travel either to SA or back from SA – i wouldn’t call that a picnic … this time I note they’ve not only got that thrown in but also are straddled with 3 in a row as well ….
Pothole – don’t forget rugby is meant to be a winter game … but given a toss up of a balmy nights in Cape Town or Brisbane against horizontal rain and max 3 degrees in Christchurch – it really is a no brainer …. Bit like me now having my whole cricket watching experience skewed by the Caribbean
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 10:49am | Report comment
I thought the Boks would be very good last year but after a positive start in NZ they came unstuck and produce some horrendous displays. Who knows what we will get this year, sure we have the players and skills to make a great team but it will depend on the grand vision of lack there of from Meneer Mustachio.
VDM – now who would select a team like that!?! One thing I cant understand and this isnt reserved for PDV alone and that is why do coaches at the highest level persist in playing people out of position. I thought you were suppose to pick the best performer in each position for the national squad not take the limited opportunity to coach someone into it. Its just crazy, at least with Smit there has been some cohesion with the national interests and the Sharks so he has been playing TH. The non fullback thing is really too big a gamble, if F Steyn is to play there then it should have been communicated to the Sharks so they could have given him more exposure in the S14. With Terblanches form and Pienaars injury it probably wouldnt have worked out in the end but at least some intention could have been seen. All it looks like at the moment is that PDV and his assistants have been kapping die wit pyp before they draw up the team.
As for Brussouw – he will get his chance, the capping on last seasons tour has proven a double edged sword as he cant play for the emerging but at least he will only play for the Boks. Its just a matter of time
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 10:59am | Report comment
Pothale,
But coming from a Pome its laughable that you dis the climate in NZ considering the weather up there in Britain its 10 times worse than ours actually it makes ours look tropical.
As for the rivalry between countrys, the old hands and rugby purists probably still rate SA as our biggest foes but the tide is swinging / has swung largely towards Australia. Nothing seems to satisfy us more than sticking one up our convict cousins across the ditch. The rivalry is intense in every single sport not just rugby. While its good to beat the Springboks its much better beating the Australians. The Bledisloe Cup for instance is huge and world famous, The Freedom Cup who really cares about that ah noone, actually I’m not even sure if thats what the NZ v SA cap is called.
South Africa is surely the hands down favourite to win the Tri-Nations this year and deservedly so. Then again while NZ may still have a newish team with a few guys who maybe are in the squad on personal rather that performance base will still field a competitive team. After all three teams still made the Semi-Finals in super rugby.
I’m still a bit stumped that the Blues have the most players in the squad after there appalling season as are the majority of the country.
However the dark horse in all of this could be the Wallabies noones really rating them and all the talk is about SA and NZ, i’m sure they will love this and go quietly about their business then turn up and smack some reality into the SANZAR partners
Jerry said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:04am | Report comment
Hemjay, I’m fairly sure Pothale’s Irish, so may not appreciate you calling him a pom. Also, what’s wrong with saying NZ’s weather is shite? It is for the most part. Tourist’s don’t come here for the weather.
Brendan said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:06am | Report comment
Its completely beyond me that PDV would select Rose ahead of Kirchner who has had an outstanding season at fullback with a couple of near faultless displays at fullback. If its for political reasons that still doesn’t make sense as Zane is also a coloured player. PDV says that black/coloured players in SA have to work twice as hard as white players in order to get recognised/selected at S14 level or higher. Perhaps but then it is fairly obvious that Rose has not ben promoted purely on form as he has had a few shockers this season particularly against the Higlanders while playing for the Lions.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:13am | Report comment
Jerry,
Irish, Pome who really cares the weathers much of a muchness isn’t it?
I don’t care that he’s saying our weathers shite. Just saying it would hold more weight if it was being said by someone from warmer climes as is a sunny day in either of those countrys is a rare occurence summer lasts all of a week lol.
Then again Jerry take a look outside today not a cloud in the sky sunny as hell and its bloody winter. The UK would be lucky to get a day as good as this in summer lol.
Brendan said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:14am | Report comment
Knives out
I notice that you say above and in other thread’s when SA rugby has been discussed, that SA rugby has not changed/developed over the years?
I think there’s been a massive change in SA rugby over the last few years in a few area’s but at the ruck in particular. I recall an SA journo visiting Bob Dwyer a few years ago on his famr in Aus and Dwyer was quoted as saying that he as dumbfounded as to the changes he’d noticed in SA rugby, both at S14 level and internation level and he singalled out the ruck as one area in particular.
Also you are now strating to see the emergence of a few genuine fetchers in some of the S14 sides. Granted they may not be in the same league at Smith, McCaw, Waugh players like Brussow, Potgieter, Vermulan and Watson are four players that one wouldn’t have seen or envisaged four or five years ago.
Also the handling and general backline skills of the S14 sides has improved somewhat in recent years.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:17am | Report comment
Also it would be interesting to know what part of Australia he is talking about. We all know NSW, VIC, TAS weather is very similar to that of New Zealand when it comes to winter. Not all of Australia is Tropical all year round. South Africa is the only country out of the three that can lay claim to that
ohtani's jacket, said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:22am | Report comment
Hello,
They’re not the Tri-Nations squads and none of the sides have played yet.
Terry Kidd said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:23am | Report comment
I agree with Brendan in that there has been a massive transformation in SA rugby in the last 5 years or so, it is noticeably faster and more open.
I also agree with Hemjay about he varying passions within the 3N. I am an Aussie and although I look forward to tests against the Boks and passionately support the Wallabies there is just something extra about a Bledisloe test …. for those tests I get banished by the wife and kids to the garage to watch by myself …. I’m not totally sure what the ‘extra’ is but I know it is felt by Aussies and Kiwis alike.
So what do Bok supporters feel? Where is the real passion for them? What do you look forward to most?
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:28am | Report comment
Hemjay – I would disagree with the SA comment, when the the ground is rock hard under frost on the highveld or the NW gales are pumping 60knots of rain in Cape Town its pretty nasty. Ok, overall its pretty pleasant most of the time but hardly tropical..then again it depends on the definition, to me it is around 30C+ with humidity
Jerry said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:29am | Report comment
Hemjay – weather where you live isn’t the issue if you’re discussing where you’re more likely to visit. The weather in the UK and Ireland may not be great (though it’s actually nowhere near as bad as a lot of people think) but regardless, if you’ve got the choice of a 30 hour trip to NZ for weather not much better than you get at home or a 12 or so hour trip to SA where you get warm temperatures in winter, what’s more likely to appeal? Add to that an element of the exotic in terms of scenery and wildlife and it’s not surprising people would take the excuse of a Lions tour or World Cup to visit.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:34am | Report comment
I look forward to our team playing foremost against the ABs, Wallabies and then England followed by the rest. Thats also the order I treasure the victories the most. The ABs as they are our closest rivals, tough, fast and uncompromising the way we like to play. The wallabies because they are wily and you just dont know what you will get out of them so they test you differently. However, and I apologise now to the Wallaby supporters but the games arent in the same class as the AB games. Beating the ABs is like beating your twin or older brother, beating the Ozzies is like beating your younger brother. Beating England is just good for the soul and the world in general
Terry Kidd said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:36am | Report comment
Lol … I like the analogies Rusty …. they gave me a smile. Yeah, beating England is good for world peace.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:52am | Report comment
Rusty,
Very funny analogies for sure.
It is amazing though how we all see the rivalries and who we think are better foes.
If we were talking performance wise I would somewhat agree that the Boks are better foes however with the added intensity of the rivalry between NZ and Aus the game takes on a whole new life and the intensity goes up a few notches. The fear of being in a losing team to the Ockers is real as is vice versa for them. Bragging rights are priceless down in the Tasman.
I’d go as far as saying the Bledisloe Cup means more to Kiwis than the Tri-Nations
As for the English who doesn’t like smashing their smug little faces around. I think you’d be hard pressed to find any country in the world at any sport who doesn’t like beating them to a pulp. I think the commonality of really loving to beat the Brits is what adds to Sanzar rugby. The Irish have never beaten NZ so until they step up they’re really not worth talking about. The Welsh are good opponents but there isn’t a rivalry of sorts its just another game more like a freindly game of two on two in the backyard.
Hammer said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:53am | Report comment
100% correct Rusty … it’s beating SA first and foremost and the others are a distant second … Wallaby games are intense – but I stil expect to win 9 times out of 10 … also have to agree re SA v Aust games – the boks just don’t seem in the same mindset … beating England’s fun – but not hard
stuff happens said | June 3rd 2009 @ 11:56am | Report comment
I was brought up in Wales and on the Monday after the game against England if Wales had won ( which in those days was usually the case ) a strange karma was in the air. Everybody smiled, people were polite and the sun always came out.If Wales lost my Father was grumpy for days and of course it rained.No other countries produced this reaction or anything remotely like it.
The old story of conquest, the Empire and the underdog.I remember going to my first international at Cardiff Arms Park when I was in school and being surprised to discover that the English supporters on the whole were very pleasant and just like us!
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
Sorry you expect to beat Aus 9 times out of 10?
when was the last time NZ beat Aus at the world cup?
James Mortimer said | June 3rd 2009 @ 12:31pm | Report comment
Spiro, you mention:
“By my count, they have eight forwards – Schalk Burger, Bismarck du Plessis, John Smit, Juan Smit, Pierre Spies, Victor Matfield, Bakkies Botha and Gurthro Steenkamp – who, on current form, would be close first choice selections in any national sides.
Five of the backs, too – Jean de Villiers, Fourie du Preez, Jacque Fourie, Bryan Habana, and J.P.Pietersen – would, similarly, enhance any other national squad.”
Essentially, you are remarking that these are World XV class players.
Firstly, on current form instantly rules out Burger, du Plessis, De Villiers, Fourie and Pieterson. And would question Habana. He like Rokocoko, has looked out of touch of late – but like smoking Joe, is not passed it.
Secondly, while I would put du Preez and Matfield to being unquestioned World XV players, the rest are close, but there are too many factors against them.
Smit is now a converted prop, he is a while away from being class in this position. Botha is good, but without Matfield acting as the perfect foil, is he of leading quality.
But essentially, the point I am making that your comment “on current form” might not be what you were after, as much as “at their best” perhaps.
I’ll leave the Wallabies out of this for now, but you then look at the All Blacks.
“The All Blacks, at least until Richie McCaw comes back for the Tri-Nations, and without Sitiveni Sivivatu until the November tour presumably, look to be light on great players. The forwards look solid, but without the special qualities the best of the South African pack has.
In the backs, Ma’a Nonu and Mils Muliaina are genuinely world class players.”
So you don’t regard (remembering the new basis of “at their best”) Andrew Hore, Ali Williams, Brad Thorn, or even Keven Mealamu or Jerome Kaino as this class.
Agree of course with Nonu and Muliaina, but while Du Preez is the best halfback in the world, I would put Jimmy Cowan and Piri Weepu at least in the top five. I would also say that Conrad Smith is approaching world class.
But, as always it is the new generation of NZ players coming up that make the AB’s look dangerous.
Read, Thomson, Messam and Crockett.
I think SA is going to have a big problem when their superstars move on. A lot of them ordinarily would have after a 2007 World Cup win. Will the Lions tour of this year be a swansong for them?
You do mention Henry’s good record, but you neglect to mention that NZ has won 9 Tri Nations out of 13. Including last year and four straight. This is their tournament, and squad strength seems to have little to do with the chances.
At the minimum, joint favourites with SA.
Obviously, this is down to opinion.
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
Politics and poor coaching has been the catalyst for the demise of Aus rugby.
Under McQueen Aus had bledisloe/tri nations/world cup.
which other tri-nations team can claim to have had that in a calendar year?
since then – under Eddie “i’ve never won as a player or coach but continually open my stupid mouth to comment on rugby even though i was banished from Aus rugby and laughed out of elite rugby circles” Jones and John “can some one check my pulse – do i have one?” Connolly….Aus one by one, lost all three. Can someone explain to be how either of those coaches got selected? both were terrible coaches of terrible QLD super 14 teams – hardly solid resume points!
Now under Robbie Deans – arguably, currently the best coach in world rugby, things can dramatically change.
look at some of the decisions already he has made in terms of selection? Out of the tri-nations, you can guarantee that all players would fear most playing a Dean’s coached side (yes, large component if obviously player talent and depth – but Aus still has a handful of players that could walk onto any side). PDV is a fruit bat (comparing himself to Jesus? hahah c’mon – i’m not religious but he should have been sacked for that alone – has there ever been a bigger pass-the-buck comment ever in sport?) and GH should have been sacked after the All Blacks choked – yet again – at the last WC.
The expectations of the respective publics of SA, NZ, and AUS would all agree that they expect a WC – whether thats a realistic expectation or not is not up for debate – but it is a fact that these are expected by each of those three nations. If a coach doesn’t deliver that for their respective nations – time to be moved on.
retiredrucker said | June 3rd 2009 @ 12:58pm | Report comment
What I’m interested in is Spiro’s comment
“Finally, there is the issue of whether coach Peter de Villiers is up to coaching a successful Springboks side.
“Given the political imperatives involved, the job is a difficult one. Why, for instance, is Earl Rose in the squad, if not for reasons of political correctness?
Last season, apparently, the senior members of the Springboks squad took over the coaching themselves at the end of the season. But this sort of player-power action generally does not continue to give results.”
Spiro, Where is this coming from? If it is true and PDV is not upto the task then I think it is a weakness that Henry and Deans will be able to exploit. I think player coaching is bound to create problems in the longrun. How does selection work?
Rusty, “kapping die wit pyp ” does this translate to “smoking the crack pipe” ? If so I
ohtani's jacket, said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
Where’s all this talk about retiring Springboks coming from?
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:26pm | Report comment
The problem with the Tri Nations vs the Bledisloe is a couple of things.
- Its a crap artificial name , something more relevant historic or personal reference would have been better. Perhaps when it does go to the 4 nations it will provide an opportunity to do so.
- The beauty of the Bledisloe is that there is more competitive history in it. Its not the ABs fault but the Boks and Wallabies need to win the series more to drive the history and interest
- They need to do away with creating trophies for the hell out of it in an attempt to emulate the Bledisloe. It devalues winning a trophy if you get another without thinking about it
Im not sure if the 3/4 nations will ever reach the mystical proportions of the Bledisloe but it would be nice if there was more a sense of history and tradition in it rather than this fast food version we get dished up. I know its constantly brought up but a mini tour would be awesome. No home and away legs just a 3 game series, say SA at home to NZ for 3 and away to OZ for 3, OZ then away to NZ for 3. Fanciful perhaps but imagine if you could include 2 midweek games for the local teams to play the dirt trackers….
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
Karlos – in SA even delivering a World cup isnt enough
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
OJ – there has been a fair amount of text written in the SA media on the OS flight of leading players after this Lions tour or Tri Nations. I would say there is credibility in it with a lot of players only extending their old contracts to cover this period and fringe players alerady making the northern run
Hammer said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
Unfortunately Rusty tours are a thing of the past outside the Lions … this is really why the concept still has legs (apart fro mthe obvious corporate cah cow angle) …
The Bledisloe does have a tradition all of its own – but typically the suits just can’t help themselves so they stuff it up … it was hard enough winning it back in a 3 game series … now its 4 the Aussies have zero chance …
Karlos – I’m going to get into a pissing competition – but regardless the feeling has always been there that NZ are expected to beat the Wallabies … with SA it’s never been like that even though it’s unfortunately been diluted via the tri-nations
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:48pm | Report comment
The All Blacks, remarkably, have lost just 16 times since the turn of the century. But seven of those losses were inflicted by a Wallaby team.
So whether or not your feeling is that SA are more formidable. Results do not agree with you.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:49pm | Report comment
it is a shame – but with a three game series thats part of the tri nations you would still get the same number of games with less travel and a series brings far more pride and interest with it. In reference to the beauty of the Lions, the game for some of the Royals would have been the pinnacle of their careers and for the young guys an exposure to teams at another level fantastic. Imagine the midweekers, ABs playing Western Province or Australia playing Auckland or South Africa playing Queensland. crap. Call me a rugby tragic but this is the stuff legends are made of – not this vaccum packed arrive, play, fly out crap. The AB versus Munster game was a perfect example of this
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
And if you think the AB deserved to win the game in HK last year – you don’t understand Rugby.
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:50pm | Report comment
Agree with Rusty.
bring back the tour.
Temba said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:54pm | Report comment
Terry from an IRB ranking point of view, SA vs. NZ is number one vs. number 2. So the two best teams battle it out would be the best game. I have been to NZ 5 times in 3 years and where ever I go bars, restaurants and events its always the same answer from the Kiwi’s they save their best for the Boks. Now this is very general, I know some around here really dislike SA but the idea I got was that to them there is no bigger union match then Bok vs. All Black.
I have some proof us this, why is it that they saved the Kappa (new Haka) for the Boks? They could have done it in front of the Wallabies a before…
I believe the number one spot is up for grabs again this 3N series…
ohtani's jacket, said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:54pm | Report comment
Rusty,
What are South Africa’s eligibility laws at the moment?
I can’t imagine these Boks not having a run at the Tri-Nations.
The Bledisloe Cup only really took off while the Boks were in exile. The ‘96 series victory in South Africa ended the Boks mystic somewhat and then the Aussies held the Bledisloe for five years, and I think that shaped modern opinion that the Australia are New Zealand’s biggest rivals, but since 2004 there’s been a shift towards the old rivalry and the more traditional heavyweight battle.
The Aussies are banking on a Deans revival, but it’s a big shrug at the moment. The best thing Deans can do is get them playing positive rugby, because they’re still capable of beating anyone on their day, but I think Karlos is dead wrong. Nobody is afraid of playing Deans’ Wallabies.
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
This just in:
“Elsom signs to ARU and Brumbies”
Terry Kidd said | June 3rd 2009 @ 1:59pm | Report comment
Temba, sorry but I can’t agree. Every NZer I know, and I know an alful lot, all say that Bledisloe tests are the be all, end all. More so even than the RWC ….. probably because its a long time between drinks.
Either way, it doesn’t matter, its your opinion v my opinion. I wasn’t asking vis-a-vis IRB rankings, I was asking what is most special.
Jerry said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
“And if you think the AB deserved to win the game in HK last year – you don’t understand Rugby.”
What does that even mean?
ohtani's jacket, said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:01pm | Report comment
The real answer is that New Zealanders like beating everyone.
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
Lewi’s performance as referee was an absolute joke in the HK match
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
regardless i think we can all agree that we’re all looking forward to this years tri-nations.
and hope SA smash the Lions – once again proving that southern hemisphere rugby is light years ahead of northern hemisphere rugby.
Jerry said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
Ah – I thought you might have some philosophical justification about Aus playing all the rugby or with better intent, but it was just whinging about the ref. Carry on, then.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:16pm | Report comment
I think its down to a age – if you remember the Boks v ABs rivalry prior to isolation, then thats what will drive you. Post that the ABs and the Wallabies only had each other and it makes sense if thats all you remember.
In terms of rivalry – stats only show one thing, that the ABs consistently beat their rivals more than they get beaten. It also shows the relative cycles of strength of the Wallabies and Boks.
As I like stats here are the Boks & Wallabies v the ABs
2000 – 2003 : Boks 1 W 8 L. Wallabies 5 W 4 L
2004 – 2009 : Boks 4 W 8 L. Wallabies 3 W 10 L
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:21pm | Report comment
Well seeing as you already know that – there was no need for me to point that out.
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
It also adds to my gripe about Aus’s coaches since McQueen left.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:23pm | Report comment
I blame the 2000 – 2003 stats on Rudolph Straulei, Harry Viljoen and every other nutcase SA had as a coach since Mallet was sacked the year before.
Jerry said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
“It also adds to my gripe about Aus’s coaches since McQueen left.”
How?
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:45pm | Report comment
MacQueen coached the wallabies from 1997 to 2001.
His wins record was 81% as coach of the wallabies.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:48pm | Report comment
Temba,
I’m not sure which pubs your going to is it the RSA services and citizens maybe?
While the Boks may pose a bigger threat the Wallabies are what gets the blood pumping most.
Rusty has pointed out something that I also pointed out earlier. It all depends on what generation your from to who you think the biggest rivalry is with. Like I said earlier the older generation 40+ will most likely tell you its the Springboks whereas those under 40 will tell you its the Wallabies.
I’ve been to many test Matches around the world and not one of them has matched the atmosphere of a Trans-Tasman clash or come even close.
All History has an origin and all eras come to an end. The Springbok Aura in NZ is not what it once was however the Wallabies are a growing force, the rivalry alone is like no other. The fierce competitiveness is something lacking when it comes to clashes with other nations.
We love beating everyone but theres something about beating those Aussies that a win over the Boks could never match
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:48pm | Report comment
Sorry Jerry to clarify – my initial comment about the coaching was in reference to Rusty’s stats of 00-03 vs 04-09
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 2:49pm | Report comment
OJ – Players overseas are still eligble for Bok selection but the fact of the matter is the current setup lean heavily in favour of local players. This combined with a growth in the depth and I seriously doubt a player will get a national call up if they now head offshore and I reckon they know it. Although for this series I wish we had called up BJ Botha as prop cover
Jerry said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:01pm | Report comment
Oh, right. Yeah, that’s probably accurate as well as losing a fair amount of talent to retirement and some of the older guys that stayed losing form (though that’s probably also related to the coaching as they didn’t have to be selected).
Lion Red said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
Karlos – have you taken into account the Apartheid Era where there was no internationals between the AB’s and the Boks during this time and the increase number of games played between the Wallabies & AB’s. Would like to know who has the best percentage against the AB’s?
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
Well Hemjay – I am short of the 40 years required but then I had to live on scraps of history past until ‘92! Its all about competing with and beating your toughest rival, the harder and less frequent the wins the better. So for us Saffers we just resumed where history left off with the AB v Boks rivalry, only the ABs were a lot stronger than we remembered! Perhaps then, if the Boks had had the ABS under the cosh like you have had us till recently then you would savour the rivalry and wins more. Using that as a reference, as Karlos points out during the Wallaby golden years the balance was with the Wallabies and that would have raised that competitive rivalry and perception to what it is today. I would therefore premise the balance will shift to whomever becomes your greatest opponent in the future. Likewise for the Boks and Wallaby supporters
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
Lion Red
Stats are as follows
Prior to 1992:
Boks 20 W 15 L 2 D 54.1%
Wallabies 24 W 64 L 5 D 25.8%
After 1992 (readmission)
Boks 10 W 27 L 1 D 26.3 %
Wallabies 15 W 24 L 0 D 38.5%
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:10pm | Report comment
oops forgot overall
Boks 30 W 42 L 3 D 40%
Wallabies 39 W 88 L 5 D 29.5%
Greg Russell said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
I don’t think Spiro has said anything outrageous. Certainly I don’t agree with everything he has written, but it’s interesting to get his opinions. Just two small points:
* Re Earl Rose possibly being a quota selection, I wondered the same about Chiliboy. I thought Derick Kuün, the starting hooker of the Bulls, was very impressive in the S14 final, and I see absolutely no reason to promote the reserve hooker of the Bulls above him into the Boks. But that is what has happened.
* Re PdV: either he has us all fooled, or else the success of South Africa depends on him adopting a Mal Meninga-like frontman role, and letting Dick Muir and Gary Gold do the nuts-and-bolts coaching, just as Neil Henry has done with the Queensland Origin side for the last few years.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:13pm | Report comment
And for completion
Boks v Wallabies
Overall:
Wallabies 26 W 38 L 1D 40%
Pre ‘92
Wallabies 7 W 21 L 0 D 25%
After readmission
Wallabies 19 W 17 L 1 D 51.4%
http://www.pickandgo.info/ – its a cracking site for this sort of stuff
Lion Red said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:15pm | Report comment
Cheers Rusty
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:20pm | Report comment
Rusty,
There is one thing that noone unless they are a Australian or a Kiwi will understand and that is the huge rivalry between the two countries. Its more than about a game its about the whole integrity of the nations.
Its something that is just not there when it comes to playing SA and this rivalry intensifies with every match. While the matches against the Boks are titanic they just don’t hold the same aura as they once did.
This rivalry isn’t just on the rugby field its in every single sport even Lawn Bowls has a very fierce rivalry
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:20pm | Report comment
Nail on the head Jerry – how Gregan was allowed to continue playing for Aus for the final 2 years or so is beyond me! he should have been dropped earlier thus forcing him to likely retire earlier. it seemed to me that every year his career progressed after his peak – he had to take another step out of the base of the ruck before he could pass the pill!
To weigh in on NZ / AUS / AB rivalry –
for what it’s worth, im going to have to suggest that AUS / NZ from my understanding is the greatest rivalry.
It stems from ANZAC and a lot of the tradition that has been built off that. Add to that the fact that NZ are AUS’s closest and arguably most similar neighbor and i think you can understand that these ties alone create the bigger rivalry. Whilst im sure NZ love beating SA and vice versa – its just not the same as compared to a brotherhood and respect forged from fighting and dying side by side.
ohtani's jacket, said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:29pm | Report comment
Whichever way you look at it, there’s history between the All Blacks and Springboks and history between Australia and New Zealand.
What hurts the Tri-Nations, in my view, is the lack of spark between the Springboks and Wallabies. These are hugely important matches in determining the championship, but follow the same pattern every year: the Boks struggle to win in Australia and the Wallabies struggle to win South Africa.
In fact, the Wallabies and Springboks are so even in Tri-Nations play (14-13-1 in favour of SA) that it probably reflects on their two championships apiece. Their overall records aren’t much different — Australia 23-32-1; South Africa 21-34-1.
Until one of these sides starts dominating the other, it’s just going to be a yearly fixture without any history or tradition. And it’s always, always going to favour the All Blacks. In order for the competition to be strong, it has to be a three way rivalry.
The ARU and NZRU are in real danger of overplaying the Bledisloe Cup rivalry. At the rate they’re going, they’d be better off pushing for Argentina in the Tri-Nations.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:32pm | Report comment
The absence of the Boks during the Apartheid era may have added to this depending on how you look at it.
The ANZACs have always had a deep;y rooted rivalry it has however morphed into something that has become world famous.
The best thing of all of this is that the top three teams in the world play in the SH, Europe may have all the dollars but it is the SANZAR nations who are the teams to beat and who are consistently at the top of the rankings. One thing we all agree on is how much we love to see the Pomes eat the dirt. From a NZ view the other Brit nations aren’t quite there and I don’t think we take them seriously as most kiwis just see the headline NZ to play Wales / Scotland / Ireland and automatically go ok heres a win just a matter of by how much and how many first choice players will be rested i’m not sure how you Safa boys see the other home unions as individual rivals but its very rare that NZ loses if ever against any of them so the rivalry is near non existent
True Tah said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:34pm | Report comment
Re: the respective rivalries between NZ and SA and Aus and NZ, I would have to say that the NZ/SA rivalry would be stronger. For so long, these two nations were the world superpowers of rugby, although at times Australia, Wales and France could claim to have this status, but nowhere near as enduring.
I wasnt around in 1956, but this was when NZ was on a war footing to beat the Boks, and they won their first ever series against the Boks, after being embarassed in 1937 and 1949. During WW2 in North Africa, the Kiwis and South Africans fought side by side against the Krauts and Eyeties and played matches against each other, whereas Aussie troops were mostly in the Pacific.
The NZ/SA relationship is so strong, the 1981 springbok tour was probably the closest NZ got to civil war since the Maori Wars, and this was due to the desire of NZ to beat South Africa in rugby, Colin Meads said it himself about South African rugby and playing them in South Africa.
Whilst as an Aussie I would take a win over both side, given we havent held the Bledisloe Cup for so long, its what I want the Boys to get back most. beating the boks is great for me, better still over in SA (my partner is a Saffa). To be honest, a lot of Kiwis have probably grown up used to beating the Wallabies, and at some stage, they probably thought the Bledisloe Cup was theirs permanently, and therefore treasure beating the Boks more, although with the death of traditional tours, this may have diminished somewhat.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:35pm | Report comment
Would love to see those games of lawn bowls!! Anyways the discussion really boils down to who you want to beat the most and it would seem clear.
For Saffers its the ABs, for the Ozzies its the ABs and for the Kiwis its the Boks for the older set and Wallabies for the youngsters.
With all due respect Karlos the AB Bok rivalry existed post WW II so I dont think you can use that as a reason. The true reason as pointed out by Ohtanis Jacket is the isolation of South Africa from sporting events due to Apartheid leading to a rise in games between the ABs and Wallabies who at that time I might add were the ABs bunnies – cheek intended
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:38pm | Report comment
OJ,
I have to agree even though the rivalry is intense 4 Bledisloe cup matches is over doing it
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:44pm | Report comment
As for the NH teams – I used to think it was a check in the win box until Nick Mallet got fired and everything went downhill. The only rivalry though would be with England and I consider that less of a rivalry and more just a need to beat them. For world peace of course. Although given how much we play/ed them at Twickers during the dark years and their own acendacy to 2003 its skewed the stats somewhat. I also have a grudging respect for the French whom I consider to be the only real threat to the SH hegemony
CronullaKiwi said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:44pm | Report comment
Beating the Boks feels like more of a an achievent than beating anyone else….by far…Boks vs AB’s is the pinnacle of the sport and always has been.
However, would rather loose to the Boks than the Wallabies anyday.
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:45pm | Report comment
Since 2000, Aus and SA have contested the Mandella Challenge Plate.
Aus have won it 4 out of 6 times – including the last three.
(Since 2006, it has formed part of the tri nations – along with the Bledisloe and are based off of all matches played between aus and sa in the tri nations series – prior to 06 – they were one off tests outisde of the tri nations except 05 where there were two tests. these were split but as SA had won the plate in 02 when it was last contested, they kept it)
retiredrucker said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:45pm | Report comment
Hemjay,
I agree wrt to the AB/ Wallibies intense rivalry but if I’m watching NZ play anyone of note(not underdogs) I always barak for my Anzac brothers! I think their is a bond(love hate!) between aus and nz that is rare to find between other nations.
I was in Queens town a week after the 2001 Bledisloe cup victory in Sydney(Larkam-
Kefu try in the last gasp) and wearing my Wallabies hat and scarf, was not given any service in the bars, once I had removed my regalia I was served promptly. I took this tobe bad sportman/fan behavior and hope Aussies would’nt behave in the same manner. I did proudly don my cap every time I was served, just to twist the knife!
I do think 4 Bledisloe matches is diluting the brand value and I do think it makes the task of regaining the Bledisloe very tough.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:47pm | Report comment
True Tah,
Mate I’m not sure you understand NZ rugby at all or the Kiwi Pysche. The whole attitude has changed dramatically in rugby circles. Where beating the Boks used to be top it no longer is at all. As I said at the top of the thread the old timers still see the Boks as the greatest foe however that train of thought and way of thinking is dieing out with them. Come to a NZ test match against either SA or Aus in NZ and you will see the difference and will notice the huge atmosphere differences. Most Kiwis will take a loss to the Boks but a loss to Australia is like taking a kick in the gonads.
Colin Meads while respected does not speak for all New Zealanders, the 81 tour divided the nation and it is still prevelant today and many a heated debate still occurs. This in itself indirectly fuelled the fire of the ANZAC rivalry as the Boks were sent to the naughty corner and became invisible for 15 years or so.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:47pm | Report comment
CronullaKiwi – well that brings another dimension to the discussion. What team would you prefer not to lose to? beside the obvious like Portugal – would have to be the Poms for me
CronullaKiwi said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:47pm | Report comment
BTW the Mrs is an Aussie so that may have something to do with it. Was hard going to the Sydney test with her last year…hopefully easier this year though I fear not.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:51pm | Report comment
you can always wear my Springbok jumper mate – for neutrality of course
CronullaKiwi said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:55pm | Report comment
The poms are pretty bad. Lived in london for a few years and they are pretty bad losers but without doubt the worst winners…
ohtani's jacket, said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:56pm | Report comment
The old boys club in NZ rugby will always consider South Africa our greatest foe. Even after the Gleneagles Agreement, the NZRU wanted rugby relations to continue between the two countries, and this was after we’d bankrolled the ARU only for them to pinch the Bledisloe from under our noses.
The 1996 series victory remains the greatest All Black achievement of the past 20 years; possibly the greatest achievement in All Black history. I don’t remember ticker tape parades when we won the Bledisloe back in 2003 and I was at that game. The atmosphere was nothing compared to 1996.
There were three things that changed the perception about the All Blacks vs. Springboks:
1) At the time of their readmission, Australia had won the ‘91 WC and beaten NZ in the classic ‘92 Bledisloe series. New Zealand and Australia beat the Boks at Ellis Park and Newlands in ‘92 and the Boks lost of the tour of Australia in ‘93 and New Zealand in ‘94. In New Zealand, the Boks lost to some NPC sides, whereas the Wallabies famously defeated the All Blacks in Sydney that year.
2) After the All Blacks lost the ‘95 World Cup final, they claimed their first series victory in South Africa in their first attempt since 1976.
3) The All Blacks beat the Boks eight straight times from 2001 to 2004.
I think the 8-4 record since then has brought them closer together and the fact that South Africa has capitalised every time New Zealand rugby has failed to win something (2004 TN, 2007 and 2009 Super 14, 2007 WC), while Australian rugby has had the lone Brumbies success in 2004, shows that South African rugby is still a force.
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 3:57pm | Report comment
Rusty – i’d rather wear a Pom jersey!
hah jokes.
I hate losing to the French. They are dirty bastards and so unpredictable.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:03pm | Report comment
Retiredrucker,
Yes I would say many Kiwis would have the same view when it comes to watching Australia take on the rest.
I’m not sure i would say you experienced bad sportsmenship maybe some light hearted banter.
As for poor sportsmen ship. That trophey has to go to some very very poor Aussie blokes out in Clayton Melbourne in 2005
I can’t remember exactly which test it was but friends and I all headed down to the local out in Clayton to watch the Bledisloe test. Aussie jumped out to a 10 pt lead early on and we had people walking past tipping there beer over our women throwing chips and burgerbuns. This all promptly stopped once a few of us got up and challenged the culprits. You see being 6′5 and 110kg certainly helped anyway the ABs started winning and comfortably these fools went very quiet. then tried getting the barstaff to change the tv to a AFL match. By this time there was a sizeable Kiwi contingent in the bar probably 2-1. Anyway as the game went on the Kiwi crowd were getting quite merry. 5 minutes after fulltime two Kiwi guys were stabbed and had their All Black Jerseys set on fire.
Of course the idiots who did this got dealt to severly by the Kiwis in there and the few sane Aussies who were around the police promptly arrived and the bar was shut for the night. I must say if i am ever out Clayton way when a footy match is on I do like to go this bar and have noticed it has taken on a very Kiwi atmosphere and not many if any Aussies supporters drink there when a test match is on all because of one very ugly incident 4 years ago by some very bad sports
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:10pm | Report comment
Question – is there a bigger rivalry in footy (both codes) than NSW vs QLD league?
i.e. how many of you will be watching tonight?
CronullaKiwi said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:12pm | Report comment
hemjay, mate that sounds pretty fkd but from my experience I can honestly say by far the majority of aussies i have met are great people and hopefully those idiots havent changed your perception of them.
Id imagine that if you were aussie you may have a similar experience hanging out in a south auckland bar…
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:12pm | Report comment
pretty hardcore story mate – have never seen anything like that for a rugby match. Had some interesting moments after watching the African cup of nations football final at the FNB stadium outside Soweto. Half the car park had been turned upside down and set alight and there were armoured police vehicles being used to disperse the crowds. I might add – we had won.
In terms of gracious losers – love the welsh and have had great times in Cardiff and Dublin with local supporters
brad said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:20pm | Report comment
The lions vs Springboks will always be bigger than the others because of the Boer war. This coupled with the fact that the Springboks are afrikaners and not of british herritage. South Africa is also more dynamic in that its pitches are hard and dry compared to new zealand and britain. Australia unfortunately does not have a strong rugby following or history so they will never be the ultimate.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:22pm | Report comment
would also always hope that the love we share for our sport would provide a comraderie that out weighs any animosity. Half the occasion of going to a game is sharing drinks with the opposition afterwards. That said you do get the bad/annoying eggs with recently a fellow Stormers fan ruining my and my mates night at the SCG….
retiredrucker said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:26pm | Report comment
Hemjay,
Very un australian behavior and unexcusable but clearly not Rugby sportsman, they would’nt be turning it to AFL. Not being familiar with Clayton,does it have a rep for stabbings?
I am sad to say I have watched aussy’s supporting the wallabies in a feral cricket fashion, what is clear is that they don’t understand the game but WC finals drag in alot of borderline supporters, which I susspect you don’t have in NZ.
I noticed you went hunting on the weekend, was it for pig or deer?
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:27pm | Report comment
bit of a change of pace there Brad and a bit of a generalisation dont you think. You might as well say the Lions v ABs are the ultimate due to all the NZ players being of polynesion or Moari heritage. Hell, lets go the whole hog and say the Boks vs Lions rivalry is due to 3 things, the Boer war to cover the Afrikaaners, Rourkes Drift for the Zulus and the British weather for driving those of English decent South.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:29pm | Report comment
Pretty Hardcore alright but it happened. If I can recall it was even reported in the age as the same night there was a bit of a scrap across the centre at another bar with rival fans supporting the AFL clubs.
The night was intense and it was only a small minority of guys I think 6 to 7 guys and in all honesty it looks like they were just out to cause trouble and pick a fight. the police said that most of them were known to them.
I’m not sure South Auckland is a rugby stronghold you’d find most of those lads tuning into the NRL. Still I have heard of some shocking stories here in Central Auckland when the Lions were here. The worst of which was up at the fiddler and it was a big scrap between some Irish boys and some pomes.
I guess there are incidents everywhere but the majority of fans and the public in general don’t fall into the catergory of guys that we encountered that night in Clayton.
stuff happens said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:32pm | Report comment
Despite the superiority complex the SH nations feel, they have often been undone by their NH cousins in the RWC:
Aust by France in ‘87
Aust by England in ‘95, ‘03 & 07
NZ by France in ‘99 & 07
And please, there’s nothing sillier than blaming the ref.
‘The fault dear Brutus is not in our stars , but in ourselves, that we are underlings.
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:33pm | Report comment
Hi Brad – you just got the idiotic comment of the day award for:
“Australia unfortunately does not have a strong rugby following or history so they will never be the ultimate.”
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:36pm | Report comment
Went and grabbed a couple of Kunekune / Pig buggers gave me the round around thats for sure. One of the pigs tore strips off my mates dog. Must say it was a great weekend south of the Bombays and it was good to get away from the hustle and bustle.
The Welsh would have to be some of the nicest and nuttiest people on the planet, even when they are getting a gool old fashioned kicking they still smile and they sure know how to party.
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:39pm | Report comment
yeah righto stuff happens.
since the world cup commenced in 1987 – SH teams have won it 5 times and NH teams have won it once.
that’s pretty conclusive.
unless of course that was the refs fault…..
Karlos said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:40pm | Report comment
yeah Welsh and Scots get my vote for good times win or lose.
Rusty said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:41pm | Report comment
Cardiff is one of my favourite places to watch rugby. Bread of Heaven being belted out in the Millenium stadium, drinks in town afterwards with some really friendly people. Only gripe is the train leaves to early on match day and too late the day after (when you dont have a place to stay)
retiredrucker said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:42pm | Report comment
On a lighter note, having immegrated to Perth when12 and learned to play rugby I’m a true blue naturalised wallabies fan.
Having played rugby with Kiwi’s and Yarpies I’m interested to see how they handle their son’s supporting the Wallabies!
CronullaKiwi said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:42pm | Report comment
Stuff happens thats a beauty! Almost convinced me there to.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 4:49pm | Report comment
My Nephews are born and bred in Australia to Kiwi Parents and both of them support the Wallabies (the kids that is). My Brother In-Law hates it but what can you expect they have lived there all their lives and apart from coming across to see Nana once a year they have no real emotional attachment to NZ even though they are part Maori which makes it even funnier.
But what makes it weirdest of all is though is that they support the Kiwis league team?
Go figure
Got to love those Mozzies huh
Matt said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:08pm | Report comment
Mozzies is a classic!
Bad sports are everywhere, but I think the behaviour is certainly better at a rugby match than a league match, especially at junior levels.
brad said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:24pm | Report comment
Karlos
Australia does not have a proffesional domestic league, Rugby is the 4th sport and they only started winning games in the 80’s. Australia has agreat rugby league herritage. Rugby is in the blood of south africans. There is history of war with the british that is less than 100 years old. The first british touring rugby side traveled to south Africa. South Africa is not a British colony They have a president and not a Prime Minister. And untill the proffesional era south Africa were by far the best rugby playing nation, in fact they pretty much dominated rugby in the 20th Century. They have more compettitive teams to tour against and i could be mistaken but only France in 1950’s and 1990’s NZ in 1996 and lions 1974 are the only touring sides to have won a test series there in the last century. The greatest lions side was 1974 BECAUSE THEY MANGED TO WIN A SERIES IN SOUTH AFRICA! not the 1971 side. new zeland has played second fiddle to springboks and Australi may play rugby but are not a rugby playing nation.
Sam Taulelei said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:33pm | Report comment
Brad
The 1974 Lions team is regarded as the greatest because they went through South Africa undefeated and not because SA were the opponent. The Lions only blot was a draw in the fourth test. In 1971 they lost the second test and drew the fourth, as well as the tour opener against Queensland before they arrived in NZ.
brad said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:40pm | Report comment
My point is that if they were to tour Australia and win 22 matches its no big feat as there is not as many strong sides down there. Victory is gauged against the strength of your opponent. Touring SA is a culture shock for the british. There is a different language tough opponents and very strong support. look how hard its been for super 12 teams this year at loftus. and compare to subiaco oval or canberra stadium.
Sam Taulelei said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:42pm | Report comment
Retiredrucker while this is off topic it’s a question that is often posed to me by my Australian in laws and friends as they all know my great love of NZ rugby and the All Blacks. I have twin sons and while I often state that they will play for Australia over my dead body, this is made in jest. If they are good enough to represent Australia in sport then I will cheer for them as wholeheartedly as if I was a born and bred Aussie. However through imitation and observation they already cheer for the Hurricanes and All Blacks, however being Victorians the greatest pull for their loyalty will be following their mother in barracking for Collingwood or their recently departed grandfather in following Geelong. I must admit that if faced with the prospect that they play rugby and are good enough to play for the Wallabies in a Bledisloe Cup, it will be a great conflict of interests between love and pride of my children and lifelong love and devotion to the All Blacks.
Sam Taulelei said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:45pm | Report comment
Brad agree that SA is a very tough country to tour for any side as is NZ. It reflects the fact that rugby in both countries is their national game opposed to other countries where it ranks behind football, rugby league and AFL.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:48pm | Report comment
Brad,
Thats a pretty bold statement.
The Springboks are a great side but your one eyed patriotism is running away on you.
South Africa have lost on a few occasions in Lions series where as NZ has only lost I find it amazing that you would even come on here and make such a bold claim.
brad said | June 3rd 2009 @ 5:56pm | Report comment
hemjay.
they lost in the 1800’s!! they did not even call themselves the boks then!
Knives Out said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:01pm | Report comment
Brendan,
My point was that the SA style has not really changed. SA teams will always come at you in a manner that the All Blacks and Australia don’t. They always play with a borderline legality and still don’t have technically recognised scrummagers, nor a recognised 7, just power, power and some more power. The only time that I have seen SA not play their traditional game of kick, tackle and be angry was during the 2007 WC when Eddie Jones got his hands on the talent. James and Montgomery still kicked long but the team looked far more capable to mix their play than at any time during the past two decades, IMO. Recall the awful attempts by Mallett, Viljoen and PdV to introduce total rugby.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:02pm | Report comment
Brad
Don’t forget your most recent defeat in 97
Sam Taulelei said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:06pm | Report comment
As Greg wrote earlier there isn’t anything outrageous or controversial with Spiro’s assessment of the relative strengths of each country ahead of their test series beginning. It’s almost a replica of what most people’s assessments were of the same sides last year, the only difference is that SA’s confidence is riding on the back of the impressive Bulls run home to their second Super 14 title opposed to the expectations after their world cup win in 2007.
Even following their Lions series we won’t know the true ability of the Springboks until the Tri Nations begins, (the same is true for NZ and Australia). I’m not devaluing the worth and merit of the contest with the Lions but given the British press propensity to write in extremes when reporting the fortunes of British teams and the expected bias from the local media results can be misleading.
Coach Peter de Villiers is often maligned and misunderstood following his press conferences but I am still bewildered as to why Deans is glorified and exalted to the skies following the performances and improvement of the Wallabies last year but yet De Villiers had a better win loss record however he’s often portrayed as out of his depth and a buffoon. I don’t know if there is any substance to Spiro’s report that the senior players took charge of the team towards the end of the year but the two most eye catching and dominant performances last year were from the Boks and the style and gameplan displayed was what de Villiers had been proclaiming and preaching since he took charge. The very gameplan that former players and his critics claimed would never work.
ohtani's jacket, said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:09pm | Report comment
As far as I recall, only the French, Lions and All Blacks have won a Test series in South Africa in the last century and the Lions did it twice. New Zealand have lost to the Springboks, Lions, Wallabies and French. Four apiece.
It’s the Springboks and the All Blacks. One can’t exist without the other. If there were no Springboks or no All Blacks, the Lions would be the centerpiece of world rugby. No thank you.
Knives Out said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:12pm | Report comment
Jerry,
the England game followed a pattern of typical Springbok rugby in the Wales and Scotland tests. You would have noticed that ‘total rugby’ was completely awol by that point. I would argue that the Springboks just had a very good game and counter attacked very well. I don’t think they intended to play like that. The way that SA played on that tour reminded me of England’s back to basics approach during the 07 WC which would suggest player power taking control. Either that or PdV and the coaching panel realised they needed some wins on the board.
retiredrucker said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:15pm | Report comment
off topic
Sam,
You never know they might get poached by some astute kiwi talent scouts and qualify by the lineage laws, you can only hope!
Oh the horror if they play ping pong. I’m faced with a similar prospect here in Perth and it frightens me, the indoctrination started the day they got out of hospital. Union needs souls!
Whats the local comp like, are you involved?
Sam Taulelei said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:30pm | Report comment
Not as yet, I’m fortunate that were I live in Melbourne the schools in our area play rugby and there is a junior schoolboys competition but my boys are still toddlers at this stage. I will get involved in some capacity and would like to coach.
James B said | June 3rd 2009 @ 6:36pm | Report comment
Let’s not forget all those gold Rolex’s and bum refs in SA prior to their readmission in ‘92 and subsequent professionalim, which earlier made it almost impossible for overseas teams to win in SA. In fact just ask 1976 AB’s what they thought – a disgrace! With neutral refs and greater professionalism, the Boks record post ‘92 is a better gauge of SA as a rugby power.
stuff happens said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:01pm | Report comment
Sam T I agree re Deans; as you know we recorded the biggest defeat in Australia’s rugby history last year. I think we’re living in hope as much as anything after years of poor coaching and a limited forward talent pool.
Coaching the Springboks must be a nightmare. I’m delighted that they now have a group of non white players who can justify their inclusion in the squad. This is the start of a new and exciting era for South African rugby and it will make it (even) stronger.
I’m tired of the sanctimonious comments by some Australian journalists about ‘Boks coaches. They have no idea how difficult life can be in SA in comparison with Australia.Observing life through the bottom of a glass of beer!
Knives Out said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:08pm | Report comment
Stuff Happens,
How is rugby life difficult in SA?
pothale said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:23pm | Report comment
Hemjay: “From a NZ view the other Brit nations aren’t quite there and I don’t think we take them seriously as most kiwis just see the headline NZ to play Wales / Scotland / Ireland and automatically go ok heres a win just a matter of by how much and how many first choice players will be rested”
I know you’re just shooting your mouth off amongst friends, but I think you just made the case as to why people prefer South Africa. And why there was an extraordinary silence amongst 80,000 people in Croke Park last year when playing the ABs.
PS – What are Pomes?
PPS – Bit of advice – Ireland is not a Brit nation. Same as New Zealand is not an Australian nation. Know what I mean?
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:36pm | Report comment
You were part of Ireland up until 1922 and your much closer to Britain than we are to Australia so do forgive me for thinking your much the same.
The only one shooting there mouth off in here is you Pothale you love to criticise everyone boast about your perceived NH rugby dominance and jump on the bandwagon of anyone who beats a Kiwi team, You like to put the boot in any chance you get. I see your a little more controlled in here than you are on the SMH but I guess your just waiting for your chance to unleash the Vitrol you often serve up in there.
Please explain to me the huge Uproar when Wales were denied the Haka Pothale also please do explain the huge crowd of your Leprechaun mates that showed up to see the ABs give them the regular thumping in November last year.
Your a bitter little man from the NH who is finding it difficult to deal with the fact that your boys just aren’t good enough to beat the Number one team in the world. Never Potty have your boys beaten the ABs and its a very bitter pool for you to swallow. Everyone knows that a game against the boys in green is all but a guaranteed win with only 80% effort required max.
I look forward to your next attack on me and see what bull stats you throw up to support your claims.
Viscount Crouchback said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:43pm | Report comment
Brad is quite right about Australia lacking a rugby tradition. I mean, for goodness sake, 1989 was the first time in a century that the Lions had bothered to devote a stand-alone tour to Australia.
This lack of tradition also makes the Bledisloe Cup distinctly uninteresting for anyone who isn’t a Kiwi or an Aussie, whereas a Bok-NZ clash is a timeles classic.
I find it remarkable that younger New Zealanders believe the Bledisloe to be more important than the Boks. Honestly, have you chaps no respect for tradition?
pothale said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:57pm | Report comment
Hemjay
“You were part of Ireland up until 1922 and you’re much close to Britain than we are to Australia.”
This doesn’t make sense. Try again.
By the way, Britain is closer to France than you are to Australia. Germany is closer to Italy. Netherlands is closer to Belgium. Any problem with identifying those countries?
Need I go on? When you get something wrong – try admitting you were wrong, rather than blustering up a laughable defence. You’ll find it a lot easier.
“I love to criticise everyone boast about perceived NH dominance……..” Where’s the evidence for that statement? I wouldn’t do that because I don’t believe it.
“Jump on the bandwagon of anyone who beats a Kiwi team” You must be kidding. I can think of much better things to be doing.
“Unleash the vitriol” – what are you blithering about?
Jesus you’re paranoid. Remove the chips from your shoulders.
“Explain the huge Uproar when Wales were denied the Haka” Don’t know what you’re talking about and why should I have to explain something that happened in or to Wales?
“Explain the huge crowd of your leprechaun mates that showed up to watch Ireland” – well they like to watch Ireland play rugby – what can I say? The fare on offer though was unexciting, boring and the crowd started to leave well before the match had finished. It was the oddest sight and I had never seen it occur with them playing any other opposition in recent years. The ABs bring out something in people – I don’t know what it is.
“I’m a bitter little man” – well you’re entitled to your opinion. I manage to get to sleep every night without worrying about the ABs though.
“it’s a bitter pool for you to swallow” I think you mean ‘bitter pill’, though a pool is a more funny image. But you’re wrong. My sleep is undisturbed thankfully.
Sorry – but I don’t have any ’stats’ for you. l’ll leave those to you.
James B said | June 3rd 2009 @ 7:58pm | Report comment
Viscount, since the Boks re-admission into mainstream rugby their record has been distinctly poor, particularly against NZ. Australia on the other hand have since the mid-80’s emerged into a true rugby power, and at times have challenged NZ’s dominance, and indeed for several years at a time, had the wood over the AB’s – 1991 & 2000-2002 spring to mind. This is what today’s generation of kids remember.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 8:02pm | Report comment
Yes Potty
Irish wins over NZ
0 a big fat zip, zero, nought, nothing one huge moon.
Must be pretty lonely there at the bottom of the pile Potty,
I await your next atack on me and SH rugby.
Hmmm now should I stick with the lure or change to a fly
Your no different in here than you are in the SMH son all you do is cut and paste and try your hardest to discredit anyone who doesn’t agree with you.
A monumental tool
Viscount Crouchback said | June 3rd 2009 @ 8:03pm | Report comment
Relax, Hemjay. At least you Kiwis can still lay claim to being part of our glorious Empire, and will soon enjoy a day off for the Queen’s birthday. Those atavistic Irish cut themselves loose and are now watching their economy descend swiftly down the gurgler without the might of the British Exchequer to bail them out.
The Kiwis might be a tad chippy, pothale, but they are faithful friends and deserve the respect of all right-thinking men.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 8:08pm | Report comment
Part of England up until 1922 your so great the Pomes = Prisoners of mother england still occupy the north of your Island.
Yes it was supposed to be pill Potty but thankfully you had the sense to see the error in my typo. As for the other countries you mention what a pathetic attempt to divert the attention away from what was solely about the Irish proximity to England and its relationship herewith.
The reality is your singular nations struggle against the SH nations and when combined your lot still struggles and thats something you struggle to deal with.
Like you Potty I lose no sleep over some country that doesn’t step up to the plate when the Southerners come a knocking.
Knives Out said | June 3rd 2009 @ 9:05pm | Report comment
Good work, Hemjay.
circus said | June 3rd 2009 @ 9:06pm | Report comment
OJ
In 1963 the touring Wallabies beat the Springboks in consecutive Tests, the first team to do so since the 1896 British team, to win the test series.
ohtani's jacket, said | June 3rd 2009 @ 9:20pm | Report comment
The Wallabies drew that series in ‘63.
circus said | June 3rd 2009 @ 9:39pm | Report comment
Thanks OJ for the correction (though we did win the following series against the Boks in Australia in 1965).
MR said | June 3rd 2009 @ 9:53pm | Report comment
Hemjay – what’s the Clayton pub, not the Notting Hill ? Would like to go with my Mozzie mate when the TN starts as it’s just up the road from Bentleigh East (actually his kids are Mozzies not him…suits them) . Beats watching it at home with only a couple of people.
Hemjay said | June 3rd 2009 @ 10:51pm | Report comment
head to the swan st tavern in Richmond much better atmosphere or to the View on Bridge Rd you’ll find many Mozzies there. There’s a pub down St Kilda way the name has escaped me at the moment its run by a Kiwi bloke and he’s got about 20 beers on tap.
pothale said | June 4th 2009 @ 12:51am | Report comment
You haven’t figured out who’s on the hook, Hemjay?
Something tells me that irony sails way over your head.
Hemjay said | June 4th 2009 @ 7:16am | Report comment
ha ha run along potty boy
pothale said | June 4th 2009 @ 7:22am | Report comment
Eh I really don’t know how to respond at your level.
ha ha run along hemjay baby.
Will that do?
Terry Kidd said | June 4th 2009 @ 7:31am | Report comment
tch tch tch …. come on guys. where else could we see a little tif played out from opposite sides of the planet? Save it for the next test bewteen the ABs and Irish.
I was at Suncorp for the Bledisloe test last year, sitting high in the stands, wearing my Wallaby colours surrounded by a see of black and the silver fern ….. and it was a brilliant night. A good game, friendly banter and cheering but high excitement and drama.
Other tests against other nations both here and os are great but just seem to lack that extra element of drama, excitement and rivalry. I guess it all comes down to who you support and who you want to beat the most.
But, in the name of workl peace lets all belt England.
pothale said | June 4th 2009 @ 7:39am | Report comment
Ok I’ll buy that. Only after we all beat Argentina though.
Keith said | June 4th 2009 @ 7:39am | Report comment
Hemjay’s predictions for the 2009 All Black season.
Tri Nations:
“Our initial assessment is that we will slaughter them all.”
Bledisloe Cup:
“God will roast the Wallabie stomachs in hell at the hands of the All Blacks”
Springboks:
“We are not afraid of the Springboks. Allah has condemned them. They are stupid. They are stupid.” (dramatic pause) “and they are condemned”
Good to see the big fella’s made a new life for himself in Auckland after being made redundant in 2003.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/__Rt973W_blQ/R3u0Gh09DMI/AAAAAAAAB7Y/QpHUCV5WWVI/s400/intro.1.jpg
Knives Out said | June 4th 2009 @ 7:43am | Report comment
A genuine moment of Roar wit and class. Pass it along.
Karlos said | June 4th 2009 @ 8:37am | Report comment
Well Brad – Australia beat Martin Johnson’s Lions in the 2001 which are widely known as one of the better touring Lions. Australia ‘A’ also beat the Lions on that tour.
You are ignorant mate, and i’d like to know when history begins and starts for you.
Yes Australia were weak during the majority of the 21st century and prior however since the professional era have been a strong side.
I’ve played and followed Rugby my whole life, and as an Australian – it’s in my blood, i don’t appreciate unintelligent folk like yourself telling me otherwise.
Similarly – get your facts straight about the tour. The first British Lions tour to the southern hemisphere was to NZ and AUS in 1888. it wasnt to SA (Shaw and Shrewsbury Team)
Temba said | June 4th 2009 @ 8:39am | Report comment
The only time I lose sleep over rugby is when the game is on at 2 in the morning.
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Nice one Temba
Karlos said | June 4th 2009 @ 9:01am | Report comment
Sam i certainly take your point “Coach Peter de Villiers is often maligned and misunderstood following his press conferences but I am still bewildered as to why Deans is glorified and exalted to the skies following the performances”
and you raise alot of other valid ones. However i think we can all agree that PDV inherited a very strong team from Jake White.
Deans on the other hand inherited a team that lacked alot of depth and certainly as compared to the Boks team. Thus there is great hope that based on what Deans has done for the Crusaders and his style – that this will be transferred to the Wallabies team. On the other hand PDV has said some outrageous things – blamed players, the press, everyone else but himself when things have not gone to plan. And speaking to alot of my SA mates – alot of SA’s believe that PDVs appointment as coach was political and he was not the deserving of the position.
Mark said | June 4th 2009 @ 9:22am | Report comment
Hemjay – thanks but teh Clayton one is more achievable for us as a chocie between Foxtel & Richomnd – Foxtel wins. Can you remember the name of teh Clayton pub ?
Cheers
Mark
Temba – very good
Pothale – I had a mate who went to Twickenham teh year England did a victory lap after a draw – it does bring World Peace but only if you win apparently
CronullaKiwi said | June 4th 2009 @ 9:40am | Report comment
great stuff Keith lol
Hemjay said | June 4th 2009 @ 9:41am | Report comment
Mark,
Well it’s actually in Keysbrough I just say Clayton as thats where the boys are and its only ten mins from their pad.
Its also called the Keysbrough Hotel more commonly known as the Keysie. I haven’t been there since 07 as the Lads and I generally hit the Swan St Tavern these days when back in Melbourne which is more often than not on Business if they get a Super 15 franchise I may just move back there
stuff happens said | June 4th 2009 @ 9:43am | Report comment
James B ’since the ‘Boks readmission into mainstream rugby their record has been distinctly poor’
Yep, so poor that they’ve won the World Cup twice.
And,outside the world of rugby tragics (like us!) nobody remembers the winners of anything except the RWC
Mark said | June 4th 2009 @ 9:47am | Report comment
Hemjay – thanks, I have the in-laws in Noble Park so I understand what sort of charming people you’ll get at the Keysborough when the AB’s start to win. St Kilda may be a better bet although you get all the pommy backpackers, kind’ve like a reverse Earls Gate with uglier girls !
Cheers – Mark
Temba said | June 4th 2009 @ 11:29am | Report comment
if you want to see something really funny check out the link, Hitlers reaction to the Bulls results over the Chiefs…. watch it to the end, what a classic!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_khc0-T3jrA
stuff happens said | June 4th 2009 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
Wonderful Temba – I had tears in my eyes.
The film, for those of you who may not have seen it, is Downfall (04) one of the best films I’ve seen about WW2. Bruno Ganz plays Hitler for which he should have won several Oscars in my view. He also appears in the Baader Meinhof Complex another terrific German film.
Made my day!
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 12:55pm | Report comment
James B & Stuff Happens
Even as a Saffer I know the RWC although very nice to have is not everything in rugby. Sure in that format we have had the greatest success vs appearances than any nation but its 4 years between drinks and since alot of our sport is based on history it pays to be credible in between. The rugby landscape in SA has changed alot over the years from pre-isolation, post isolation into professionalism (although we do our best to run the sport like amateurs). With it the Springbok performance, which like all nations has risen and fallen . Breaking it down into some relevant time periods
Pre Isolation <’92 : (P 174 W 112 L 47 D 15)
The Boks had a winning ratio of only 64.4%, but a very equal home and away record of 64.3% and 64.5% respectively with better win to loss ratios against all Nations. During this time to say the Boks werent the most dominant country in world rugby would be farcical. Even with the ref call the away record sums it up
Post Isolation – early years 92-94: (P 21 W 9 L 10 D 2)
A win rate of only 42.9%, 37.5% at home and 46.2% away. A very poor return to international rugby after isolation with losses home and away to all major nations. A pretty painful wakeup call on how the landscape and international players had changed
Post Isolation – Golden age, WC and start of professionalism 95-98: (P 48 W 37 L 11 D0)
Superb win rate of 77.1%, 76.9% at home and 77.3% away. A golden era for the Boks yielding a World Cup, Tri Nations trophy and joint record of 17 consecutive wins under Nick Mallet. Who also could forget the galvanising effect on a nation of Nelson Mandela in Francois Pienaar’s jersey holding the Web Ellis aloft.
Post Isolation – The dark years 99-03: (P 59 W 31 L 27 D1)
With a win rate of a mere 52.5%, home 72% and away 25%. The Boks struggled under first Viljoen and then Straueli in this period which also coincides with the respective rise of Australia and England to their World cup glories.
Post Isolation – the 2nd Golden age or Jake White years 04-07 (P 54 W 36 L 17 D1)
Win rate of 66.7%, 82.6% at home and 39.1% away. Start of a resurgence through Whites faith and consistency in selection picking the Boks out of the gutter to win another world cup and tri nations title as well as the final reversal of the wood on the English at twickenham. The good in this period is slightly tarnished by the poor away record to the major nations but is significantly above his predecessors and offset by near unbeatable record at home.
Post Isolation – the PDV era 08< (P 13 W 9 L 4 D 0)
Win ratio of 69.2%, 71.4% at home and 66.7 % away. In what should have been an extension of the Jake White era of success there has been a blend of good and bad. A win in NZ, thrashings of England and Australia balanced by being blanked at home for the first time ever, surrending an 8 year home streak against the Australians and an unconvincing NH tour. With high expectations for the BI Lions and Tri Nations the jury is still out on the current administration but for now the numbers show a strong South Africa which can only be good for world rugby. World rugby needs lots of strong nations
So concludes the history lesson. I might have gone off tangent there but my point is that all nations have cycles and to blanket say since re-admission the Boks have been kak is a gross generalisation. Even the mighty ABs in ‘98 and Wallabies through the Jones era have had their downward curves. Just some nations it takes a lot longer to hit the up, England for example is still struggling after the euphoric heights of 2003.
James B said | June 4th 2009 @ 1:06pm | Report comment
Stuff Happens – the Boks have a 62.6% win percentage since 1992, compared to AB’s 78.7%. The Boks as you correctly point out won 2 RWC’s to NZ’s 1, which is not a big deal when you consider there have only been 6 tournaments held. The RWC is a knock-out tournament, and often the winners have a relatively easy draw and/or don’t face the best team in the world, a good example of this was in 2007 where the Boks faced Fiji in the q-finals, Argentina in the semis and England in the final, the latter with an IRB ranking of 6 going into the tournament. As for 1995, well we all know the story about the gold Rolex watch given to the referee after the semi-final against France, and anyone who saw that game knows the French were robbed. For the last 10 mins of the game the French were camped in the Boks goal line… I lost count of how many times the Boks collapsed the scrum. An apppalling piece of refereeing, the reasons which only came out later in a post-final drucken speech by a SA official. This is not of course forgetting the Boks played against a one-legged AB’s team in the final.
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
James B – No one is disputing the magnificent record of the ABs 78.7% to the Boks 62.6%. You cant, in the same token you cant also dispute the Boks 50% record in World Cups compared to the ABs 16.6%. You can look at it however you want but the facts are the facts and anything else smacks of bitterness.
stuff happens said | June 4th 2009 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
James B what is it about Kiwis & blaming referees, bribery & Suzie the waitress,but,never of course the simple fact that they lost.
None of this would have mattered if the All Blacks had won their games would it? It’s sad. You’re a great rugby nation and you shouldn’t stoop to this .
Oh and the ‘Boks have won two RWCs from four tournaments – a 50% record.You will die unhappy trying to equal that.
Jerry said | June 4th 2009 @ 2:23pm | Report comment
Rusty – while the Boks had a better head to head with NZ prior to isolation, NZ had a better percentage winning record overall both home and away – ie, NZ had better head to heads with all the other countries than the Boks did. So it’s not completely cut and dried that the Boks were the most dominant. There’s certainly an argument to be made that they were, based on that head to head with NZ and of course NZ not having won a series in SA, but I’d hardly call it ‘farcical’ to argue that NZ were better overall.
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
Thats a fair call Jerry – perhaps the argument was slanted a little toward SA being better than NZ based on head to head with their nearest rival but you are right overall its an opposite picture. Hmm shall we settle on the 2 best teams in the world pre isolation?
After that its all been cyclical as per previous comment
Marty said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:01pm | Report comment
We all know the New Zealanders have under delivered at world cup level. However they are consistantly the number one team in the World. Too much emphasis is put on a tournament that is held once every 4 years.
I sit and hope that someone beats them in a World Cup before they get to England or the Wallabies because the chances of us beating them are fewer and its much better that someone else does the hard work. New Zealand are always the team to beat everyone wants to see them go down more than anything. The Springboks while a fantastic team do not hold the same prestige as the New Zealand team. I am a transplanted Englishman living in Australia and I am amazed at the presence that comes with all three teams in the SANZAR but there is something different about the All Blacks truly a Global Brand and their reputation is huge.
In some ways its strange they haven’t gone on to win more championships but lets be honest here no other rugby nation in the world has to deal with the pressure the New Zealand team does. No other team in the world has so many people wanting them to lose. Everyone hates the English but its not because we are good at rugby which we aren’t, but because people just seem to have it in for the Motherland
I’m hoping like hell the Lions get up in the Test Series in South Africa and after last nights demolition of the Golden Lions my confidence levels are starting to rise once more. The Bulls were absolutely fantastic in the Super 14 but will that form cross to the test series?
Karlos said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:06pm | Report comment
ill never forget 2006 tri-nations Aus vs SA at Suncorp…cos i was there.
49-0
BOOM!
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:17pm | Report comment
Karlos
Agree that was an obliteration, but I think you will find that every country has some moments it would rather forget.. but I wont forget dropping 61 points on the Wallabies at Loftus in 1997, the 3N whitewash in 2005 or the 53 points on Deans Wallabies last year – BOOM!
Temba said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:21pm | Report comment
Yeah bigger boom!
or 36 – 0 on the same bunch that kicked you out the RWC….
Temba said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:22pm | Report comment
If I am not mistaken the one in SA last year was the wallabies worst defeat ever…
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:24pm | Report comment
Now Temba dont gloat it still wasnt by 49 points to a doughnut.. just a point that great rivalry and blowouts can occur to everyone
Karlos said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:24pm | Report comment
yes but at least we scored 8 last year against you….
and at Loftus, we still scored 22.
that’s a much lesser point differential than 49!
and to be held completely scoreless? not a single penalty? drop goal?
chk chk BOOM!
Karlos said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
well put Rusty!
Fok Ja!
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:47pm | Report comment
interesting facts on doughnuts – besides being deep fried dough covered in icing sugar
Last time the Wallabies were held to one was 1973 by the Welsh 0-24 at Cardiff Arms Park (cue hilarious scene of Welshmen assaulting Wallabies with actual doughnuts). Prior to that the Lions 0-31 in Brisvegas in ‘66. The last doughnut at home to a national side was to SA in ‘56 again at Brisbane with a score of 0-9
Last time the Boks were held to zero was in Cape Town ‘08 0-19 to the ABs, the first time a national side had done that on SA soil. Not so uncommon offshore though with Karlos’s 0-49 to Australia in ‘06 being next
Last time the ABs were held to zero was to a draw with Scotland at Murryfield in ‘64 followed 0-13 by SA at Ellis Park in 1960. Closest to a home doughnut was in ‘21 with a 0-0 draw with SA
Karlos said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:51pm | Report comment
yes you may have beaten the old dart 36-0.
however we beat them 76-0 in ‘98…
Hemjay said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:52pm | Report comment
Rusty,
Where do you find all your facts and things have you got an almanac or is there a certain site your heading to?
Cheers
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 3:56pm | Report comment
Hey Hemjay -a bit of everything really (thanks Google) but for stat breakdowns and historical results you cant beat http://www.pickandgo.info/. As a stat freak I find it really informative and useful when having to quantify why a randoms comment is completely off chart
Karlos said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:02pm | Report comment
http://www.rugbydata.com is also good.
Hemjay said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:02pm | Report comment
Sweet Mate,
I’ll check it out.
Google is bloody annoying it throws up heaps of random stuff with the odd good bit of information. You do get a lot of Wikipedia articles but you can never be 100% positive with that site.
If you find any other good sites let me know and I will vice versa
Afterall sharings caring lol
Cheers
Hemjay said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:03pm | Report comment
Thanks Karlos
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:04pm | Report comment
lol – no worries bru
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:07pm | Report comment
actually – does anyone have access to a data source with player specific stats such as line breaks, offloads etc Would be interesting…
Karlos said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:14pm | Report comment
interesting stats over the last 10 years between NZ/AUS/SA.
since 1998 (wins as stated after country).
AUS & NZ have played 27 games.
NZ: 15
AUS: 12
SA & NZ have played 26 games.
NZ: 18
SA: 8
AUS & SA have played 28 games.
AUS: 14
SA: 13
(and 1 draw)
pretty interesting. I actually didnt expect it to look like that.
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:21pm | Report comment
Thats because a lot of focus is on the 3N forgetting WCs and one off tests in the same period
Karlos said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:22pm | Report comment
that includes WC and one off tests.
it’s all matches played
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:22pm | Report comment
and I might add we (Boks) were as mentioned kak from 99-03
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:23pm | Report comment
yeah – thats what I mean. You would think the numbers were different based on the 3 nations results
Karlos said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:26pm | Report comment
still – it is interesting – wasnt trying to stir.
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:28pm | Report comment
didnt think you were
Hemjay said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:30pm | Report comment
Dam I never Knew the ABs had played Rhodesia and lost to them 10-8 in 1949
Rusty said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:31pm | Report comment
what it does show is that in this time period NZ and Australia are closer than thought and SA and Australia are pretty much even. It also emphasies the wood that NZ has enjoyed over SA in recent times, although I hope we are starting readdress that
Mark said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:32pm | Report comment
Hemjay – don’t you have some drying paint to watch ?
Hemjay said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:38pm | Report comment
Mark – I thought you were doing a pretty good job and I didn’t want to steal your thunder son
Mark said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:40pm | Report comment
I’ll pay that one.
Jerry said | June 4th 2009 @ 4:51pm | Report comment
The thing about those stats, is that they include the most successful period in Aus vs NZ history (7-2 from 98-01) and the most successful period in NZ vs SA history (8-1 from 01-03).
Greg Smith said | June 4th 2009 @ 6:47pm | Report comment
For South Africa to terminate the Trans-Tasman final ’syndrome’ there’d have to be a shift to TOTAL RUGBY by SARFU.
Total Rugby is not an 80 min on the field game but involves shades & varieties of the following:-
[Following NZ & Oz examples-]
1. Media ‘warfare’
Boks could dedicate 2009 to Cameron Doomadgee (an aborigini killed in police custody)
Boks could stir up New Zealand with calls for a ban of the haka etc – get creative…
Imperative to get INTERNATIONAL media dominance
2. Propaganda
Vilification of the opposition – spear tackle investigations, eye gouging allegations, claims of recklessness
3. Playing the IRB
Use the halls of the IRB to maximum benefit
4. Play the International Referee’s Committee
Launch early appeals (remember the Schalk Burger ploy by NZ)
Call for citings to thin out opposition (remember the Bismarck du Plessis ban)
5. Trial by TV camera
Employ hi-zoom technology and sports editors on cue for post match name soiling and get this out internationally
(remember Wellington)
6. South Africa could launch DRUG allegation claims at NZ or OZ (timed correctly)
7. Spying allegations
8. Use Nelson Mandela or other leading global figure to maximum pre-game effect
9. Call for a change of ball design (see new South African ball)
10. Change the color of the Bok rugby jersey to DARK GREEN
11. Suddenly manipulate venues, schedules, hotels, training facilities to unsettle.
All these and MORE, could influence the Tri Nations 2009 – so it’s tough to call …
Who will play TOTAL RUGBY best in 2009 ?
I think Australia … they’re sublimely shifty.
[Oz and NZ can count themselves lucky I'm not part of the Bok administration... I'd get VERY creative on the AB's & Wally's]
Hemjay said | June 4th 2009 @ 6:58pm | Report comment
Greg Smith. Your a few Weetbixs short of a packet there lad. If anything you do provide entertainment value.
Greg Smith said | June 4th 2009 @ 7:38pm | Report comment
Less cynically – the hearts and minds battle in the oppositions camp could involve;
- training sessions with school children (and orphans)
- visits & talks by past greats
- free kit donations to the homeless and needy
- book signings & free tickets for your granny
- the Boks could go to New Zealand & extinguish a dangerous volcano or save a cat outta tree/prevent an earthquake
- a Bok contingent could fight Bush Fires in Oz
Free Bok coaching clinics for the emerging AB’s
Free fitness sessions for the Wallaby’s
Free Saffer head doctors for the whole of New Zealand (re Choking)
Free BMT (bacon mayonnaise toasties) for New Zealand
ohtani's jacket, said | June 4th 2009 @ 10:35pm | Report comment
That Hitler video was good, but you can’t beat the Tottenham Spurs one.
Knives Out said | June 4th 2009 @ 10:38pm | Report comment
Tottenham Hotspurs. What video is that?
ohtani's jacket, said | June 4th 2009 @ 10:41pm | Report comment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP0dTWRCJeQ
Knives Out said | June 4th 2009 @ 10:44pm | Report comment
Paul Robinson. And I’d managed to forget all about him..
Thank you for the link.