Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- International Rugby Union - Six Nations, Heineken Cup, Rugby Championship news
- South Africa Springboks news
- British and Irish Lions news
Not long after half-time when the Springboks set a 35m rolling maul and then forced a try to take a 26 – 7 lead over the British and Irish Lions, it looked like all the pundits and experts (including Warren Gatland, an assistant Lions coach) were correct in allotting favouritism to the home side.
Then the several things happened which turned the Test and almost enabled the Lions to snatch a miraculous victory.
Lions coach Ian McGeechan gave Phil Vickery, the burly England prop, the hook. Vickery left the field with the bewildered and defensive look of a man who had been mugged so expertly he still wasn’t sure of what had been taken from him.
In this case it was his reputation as a great scrummer by the unlikely Tendia Mtawarira (‘the Beast’), a prop more noted for his barging runs than his scrum skills.
Adam Jones came on as Vickery’s replacement and immediately the Lions scrum steadied. And with the steady scrum and the drying up of scrum penalties to the Springboks, the Lions found and began to execute their game plan. Time after time their centres, the burly Jamie Roberts and the pugnacious master Brian O’Driscoll, carved through and set up tries and penalty shots.
Peter de Villiers, the flaky Springboks coach, around the same time began to start taking off the heart of the pack, Mtawarira, Heinrich Brussow, Bakkies Botha, and John Smit. It was as if the coach was trying to warehouse these players for the next Test.
The Lions roared back.
And it was some seeming gamesmanship that allowed John Smit to come back on to the field when the Springboks were desperately defending their 26 – 21 lead that steadied the home side.
Dion Carsten’s injury seemed to be very well timed. Smit, who is an excellent captain who saved the Springboks in the hectic last minutes of the quarter-final against a rampant Fiji in the Rugby World Cup of 2007, settled his side this time, as well.
Despite their magnificent lineout, with Victor Matfield now in the John Eales class as a lineout jumper and poacher, and their strong scrum, the Springboks gained only 32 per cent of the territorial possession and did not go through seven phases at any stage in the Test. The Lions had seven seven-phase sections of play.
More importantly, they cut the Springbok defences many times in the Test from their first attacking scrum when Ugo Monye was robbed of a try by a superb tackle and flip of the ball by Jean de Villiers.
Monye lost another try, too, when the ball was knocked out of his inside arm (when it should have been held on the outside) near the tryline by Jacques Fourie.
When the Springboks smashed the Lions scrum, over-powered the Lions rucks and mauls and then launched their 35m maul (the best since England’s epic 45m rumble at Melbourne against the Wallabies in 2003). I must admit I had a frisson of pleasure wondering how the northern hemisphere blowhards who denigrate southern hemisphere forward play were now feeling.
The criticism of the New Zealand referee, Bryce Lawrence, was so muted by the usual British press suspects you realised that they must have recognised that his rulings were correct.
I cannot forget an occasion in Sydney some years ago when, after a Test against England, I came into a room of British journalists who were discussing among each other how to write up their leads on how appalling the referee had been. Clearly, the cabal was not operating this time.
This was one Test, anyway, where the Lions players can only blame themselves for their defeat. They allowed the Springboks to intimidate them early on. They gave away an early soft try. Then they conceded too many kickable penalties. Stephen Jones missed a couple of penalties in return. Their scrum was pulverised. And tries were butchered by poor skills.
To be honest, as well, when the Springboks went to their big lead I thought that the Lions were done. But to their credit they came back. Towards the end of the Test they got themselves into a position where it could have been snatched away from the Springboks. The return of Smit and a botched lineout by the Lions finally killed off a magnificent comeback.
Where does this leave the series?
The conventional wisdom before the Test was that if the Springboks won the first Test they would go on to win the next two Tests at altitude to take out a 3 – 0 wipeout. The theory behind this was that the Springboks would get better as they got more match practice and the Lions challenge would fizzle out if it was not immediately successful.
The British media is now pushing a new line that in 1989 the Lions lost their first Test against the Wallabies, and then won the next two Tests. The Lions coach on that tour? A certain Mr Ian McGeechan.
McGeechan is being seen as the master coach who has won more important matches than any other coach (something I’d contest). But there is no doubting that McGeechan has prepared this Lions side very well, and has won two series as the Lions coach, something that no other coach has achieved.
In the last 20 minutes the Lions looked to have the Springboks at their mercy which few pundits (if any, and certainly not me) had predicted.
They had also saved the Lions franchise.
For before the Test there were suggestions that if the Lions were thrashed the point of the Lions existing, which is based on the hopes of their fans that they will be successful, would disappear.
Now, though, we are now set for an intriguing second Test, and for a continuation of future tours no matter what happens for the rest of this tour.
Will the Springboks improve and be dominant at altitude? Or will the Lions, seemingly a fitter side than the Springboks and with much better skills in the backs, win the Test and set themselves for an unlikely series victory?
Pretoria on Saturday holds the answers to these questions.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (198)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (172)
- Brumbies 2012: New coach, new players, new attitude (128)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (61)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Chiefs continue to wait for SBW (2)
- Nathan Sharpe to retire at end of 2012 (2)
- Queensland ready for Super challenge (2)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (48)
- Foley excited about Samoan rugby challenge
- Force rugby coach praises his pack
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (52)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (26)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (18)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
van der Merwe said | June 22nd 2009 @ 8:17am | Report comment
While it is always sad to see a legend’s career end before your very eyes, it gave me immense satisfaction to see how the “overweight hooker” and the “weak quota prop” crushed their opposition. Poor Phil! I guess he can now empathise with Al and Matt.
Burger will probably run out for his 50th Cap next week, by the way.
Ian Noble said | June 22nd 2009 @ 8:39am | Report comment
Geech seems to have forgotten that in .97, Tom Smith and Paul Wallace were the Lions props; both similar build to Jones. Vickey at 6’2” was too tall allowing the Boks to burrow into him. Also Geech is fixated by the Wasps connection as Tim Payne has been called up as back up to Sheridan, who has a back injury. Sorry but I don’t rate Payne.
In spite of my concerns, what a test match and can’t wait for next week. Ironic that so many SH posters and hacks have decried NH back play yet in Durban all the invention and exciting play came from the Lions once they had settled into their game.
Mart said | June 22nd 2009 @ 8:58am | Report comment
Cracking Test, great contrast in styles, compelling rugby. Despite the Boks success in the scrum (espacially in the first half) the Lions basically crossed the line 6 times and only grounded 3 so it could be claimed they lost it. I thought the Kiwi ref had an OK game generally but with the huge exception of penalising the Lions at the scrums. The Lions captain’s post match comments were spot on. Vickery (and the rest of the Lions pack) was comprehensively outplayed in the 1st half especially but he’s not so dumb as to give away the same penalty 6 or 7 times (especially in kickable range). Quite clear Beast was illegally engaging almost every time but not picked up once ! I recall one penalty just before half time (in front of the posts) when even the SA commentators on replay said “well, we aint got a clue what that one was for” and they aren’t the most neutral as we know ! A real shame since the ridiculous to-fro on laws from the IRB means it’s all “subject to interpretation” these days, and with a 5 point margin this effectively impacted the result of the game. I can’t recall such odd scrum reffing since Andrew Watson in the 2003 RWC Final. Having said all that, great Test in every sense. Hard to argue with 3-0 to Boks now but could have been veeery different.
Ian Noble said | June 22nd 2009 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Mart
Don’t write off the Lions off yet, as scratch side playing together for only six weeks against a well oiled machine being together for at least 3/4 years it was not a bad performance. Playing at altitude may be problem but they will give it a good crack and another week together should improve the performance.
Vincent said | June 22nd 2009 @ 9:12am | Report comment
What about Croft? and to think he was going to be left out of the Lions selection! can;t wait for the next test!
Knives out said | June 22nd 2009 @ 9:21am | Report comment
This loss is the fault of the selectors. Unfortunately Sheridan and Murray were injured, but Adam Jones had been far superior to Vickery during the provincial games, however, McGeechan and company decided that they were going to select a side to out work the Springboks in South Africa in the first Lions test in 12 years. Good luck with that gentlemen. The ‘Fleet Street hacks’ (Who are these people?) are probably emphasising McGeechan’s Australian victories simply because prior to the tour they refused to admit his obvious weaknesses.
As expected – by few, I might add – the heavyweight Springbok pack went to work on the Lions pack and got their rewards. Vickery was penalised for 9 points and for 6 of those Mtawarira was boring in and up which is clearly illegal. Regardless, SA had the impetus and clearly had the shove on so good luck to them. That they were allowed to was down to the composition of the forwards. Vickery has never been a great scrummager – he is 6’3 and the only great scrummaging tighthead of that height over the past decade has been Carl Hayman. Why on earth, then, was he selected with Gethin Jenkins, another erratic scrummager? There simply was no balance to the front row and boy did it show.
The success of the current Lions tour lies in the fact that McGeechan has taken a common sense approach but this seems to have eluded the team selection with the coaches seemingly having forgotten that the scrum is the breakfast of rugby.
Mtwawira was made to look like the converted flanker he is during the Autumn tests because big packs including at least one strong scrummaging prop and one donkey second row absorbed his power and left him tired and bemused. The Lions pack did not have the balance and therefore the capacity to do that. Not many doubted the forward play of SA (Which Mr. Zavos seems to confuse with continuing and accurate criticisms of Australia) and it was no surprise to see them maul the way they did given they have always been a big mauling team and have played together for so long as a squad.
The lineout was always going to be an issue and Lee Mears did not fulfill his part of the bargain here, however, the breakdown was much less of an issue with Brussouw being basically redundant, alongside the much vaunted Pierre Spies. So, aside from the scrum the forward exchanges were rather give and take.
The great irony for me is the same that Ian Noble alludes to. SA played what one would consider the SH stereotype of NH rugby, and they did it very, very well, but beyond that they looked utterly clueless. Perhaps this is down to a lack of game time, but I have long had my suspicions that the highly rated SA backs aren’t actually particularly impressive in contrast to their NZ counterparts. An interesting parallel is that the bemoaned ‘plodding’ NH players showed, spark and dynamism. This series was always far more winnable than NZ in 2005 but maybe that chance has now gone. Overall, I really enjoyed the first test. As hurtful as it was, it was also a pleasure to watch SA play such mistake-free perfectly executed and effective rugby in the first half. The question remains, however, who can improve the most? I think the Lions can but will that translate into a win? Maybe SA will blow the Lions away, maybe they’ll sneak a win. Whatever happens the first test was memorable. I just wish that the Lions were facing Australia next week.
Vincent said | June 22nd 2009 @ 10:09am | Report comment
And as for everyone crying out that the “Beast” was scrummaging illegally…as a prop I say you get away with what you can, but at the same time you must be able to ‘discipline’ your opposing prop so he does not get the upper hand..obviousy Vickery failed in that aspect…I really don’t expect to see him feature in the run on squad.
Amateur Hour said | June 22nd 2009 @ 10:11am | Report comment
I wish Australia was playing the Lions next week too. Unfortunately we have to face France, which looks like a tougher and more composite group than the Lions did on the weekend. What a try to Cederic Heymans!
There is no way that PDV will be allowed to skip his meds again on game day, so we are not likely to see the ludicrous, wholesale type changes again that were made mid-way through the second half on Saturday, which was the only thing that prevented the scoreline ending up where it was headed when it was 26-7.
The Test this week is at Pretoria, home to the Bulls and a large portion of the Boks starting 15. There is a snowball’s chance in hell that they will not be absolutely primed for this match having blown out the cobwebs last weekend after a decent lay-off for a large number of their players.
Australia caught them with their pants down last year and managed to chalk up a win on Sth African soil (at altitude), but the next week were comprehensively smashed by 50-8. The Lions did not do them the indignity of a defeat, but they did go close, so I’m expecting asimilar style of retribution and scoreline.
Spiro, I don’t think that Fourie du Preez did much on the weekend to substantiate your claims that he is the world’s best at the moment. Was he perhaps carrying an injury?
One moment that I keep thinking back to is the on-field arguement between the Kiwi referee and the French TMO regarding the appropriate decision after Monye’s try was judged to have been held up. Classic. Did you catch any of it in the UK?
Mart said | June 22nd 2009 @ 10:25am | Report comment
Knives – “Vickery was penalised for 9 points and for 6 of those Mtawarira was boring in and up which is clearly illegal. Regardless, SA had the impetus and clearly had the shove on so good luck to them”. And SA won by 5 points !!!
AH – agree with the great ref / TMO comment for the disallowed Monye try. Not sure of the value of the TMO if he suggests a 5 metre scrum and the ref over rules and gives a 22 dropout ! But I guess this was a Kiwi getting back at a Frog for recent rugby history between the 2 Nations ?!?!
Hayden said | June 22nd 2009 @ 10:27am | Report comment
Great game, great come back form the Lions, but I can’t help but feel that all this talk of a close game next week is a pipe dream for Lions supporters. This was their best chance, and they came up short. The Boks won’t take their foot off the throat again if they are in the same position. Their only hope is that PdV shows up dressed as John the Baptist during the week and proclaims Earl Rose as the new messiah, and puts him in the starting line up.
van der Merwe, if you’re reading: is it just me, or is Smit the Boks talisman? It seems they are twice the team with him on the field, and look very shaky when he is off.
Boks by 20 next week. Sorry.