Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Tri Nations Tournament news
- New Zealand All Blacks news
- South Africa Springboks news
- British and Irish Lions news
South African head coach Peter de Villiers speaks during a media conference at the Sun Square Hotel, Johannesburg, South Africa, Thursday July 2, 2009 ahead of Saturday's final test against the British Lions. AP Photo
Last week, before the Wallabies set off to play their Test against the Springboks at Cape Town, I talked to Robbie Deans about the prospects of his team, their possible tactics (although he was cagey on this) and how tough it is to beat a very good Springboks side in South Africa.
It was a chat rather than an interview.
At one point in the conversion I said, rather ingratiatingly: “At least you have an advantage in the fact that the Springboks coach, Peter de Villiers, is a pretty flaky fellow.”
Deans looked at me in his characteristic uncompromising, New Zealand farmer’s stare, and replied: “Don’t doubt for a a second that the Springboks are a very well coached team.”
Thinking about this, especially after the report a day or so ago that de Villiers had launched a rant about how the Wallabies ‘cheat’ in trying to milk scrum penalties and protect their own scrum, I realised that Deans had made a valid and interesting point.
We are inclined (and I include myself among the guilty party of rugby writers in this) to dismiss the rants of de Villiers as a template of the sort of preparation invested in the Springboks before their Tests.
Of course, most of what de Villiers has to say, especially the bewildering references to the Bible, makes no sense in the ordinary run of things. But there is, I am beginning to realise, some method in this madness.
Take the example of his rant about the Wallabies scrum.
The Wallaby lineout is probably going to be more effective against the Springboks than the All Blacks lineout was. So de Villiers and the other coaches have identified the Wallaby scrum as the weak link in the team’s systems.
Craig Joubert, the South African referee at Eden Park in the first Tri-Nations Test, hammered the Wallabies with penalties at scrum time.
de Villiers is clearly trying to influence Saturday night’s referee, Alain Rolland.
Rolland officiated at Marseille in the Australia-England quarter-final in the 2007 RWC. In The Australian, the rugby writer Wayne Smith pointed out that while Rolland gave the Wallabies the first two scrum penalties in that match before penalising them repeatedly, he also allowed the early scrums to be reset about eight times.
According to Smith, this tired the Wallaby pack so severely they did not have the energy to hit the rucks and mauls with any authority.
The Springbok fullback Francois Steynhas correctly made the admission about the victory over the All Blacks: “It was a great result, but we didn’t do anything … we just kicked the ball, chased and they made mistakes.”
Steyn suggests that the Springboks will try to play more rugby on Saturday than they did last week.
I don’t believe this.
Whenever the Springboks have tried to play rugby they’ve come unstuck.
Last year, for instance, the Wallabies won 27-15 at Durban, their second victory only in South Africa in the Tri-Nations tournament. The Springboks had tried to play clever rugby and were undone.
The side then took over the coaching itself, apparently, and went back to the smash-and-grab game they play to effectively. Tthey targeted Timana Tahu and the Wallabies were destroyed 53-8.
This is one of the great Springboks sides. But it is beatable, even in South Africa as the All Blacks and Wallabies proved last year and the British and Irish Lions did this year.
The Wallabies have had a long time to plan the undoing of the Springboks.
The coach seems to have a shrewd insight into how smart the Springboks are in preparing for their Tests. It will be intriguing to see on Saturday night if the Wallabies come up with the game plan and the execution to achieve a victory the bookmakers, at least, believe is a virtual impossibility.
The Wallabies need to forget what current rant de Villiers is on and concentrate on the clever, if predictable, tactics his team will employ on Saturday night.
Recommend this story.
August 6th 2009 @ 10:58am
Terry Kidd said | August 6th 2009 @ 10:58am | Report comment
Jameswn that has puzzled me too. Why does a Waratah pack, a pack that should be inferior to the Wallaby pack, manage to dominate at scrum time against most comers, but the Wallaby pack struggles or gets penalized? Why is it that Baxter is not penalized in S14, under many of the same refs who do 3N games, but is penalized in tests?
Guys, I’m not backing Baxter here but it still puzzles me. I also agree that Baxter did deserve a couple of the penalties against the ABs but likewise so did Woodcock. I have no doubt it will be the same against the Beast. I know that it comes down to a referees interpretation but Baxter does seem to carry a ‘rep’ with refs at test level but not at S14 level. Why?
August 6th 2009 @ 11:08am
johnny-boy said | August 6th 2009 @ 11:08am | Report comment
Spot on HD – sacrifice some hit for stabilty – and give your team a b…. chance to do something – rather than have them get more and more pissed off and frustrated with Baxters inability to do his job and stifle any opportunity for the team to develop some momentum. If Deans starts Baxter (and he would be bloody mindedly stupid to do so) and he starts getting penalised and Deans doesnt pull him off immediately, the Deans experiment is a goner. You cant win when one of your players insists on making the team go backwards over and over, cos he thinks he’s right. It’s just dumb and inexcusable.
August 6th 2009 @ 11:29am
Sam Taulelei said | August 6th 2009 @ 11:29am | Report comment
The Wallabies will have to perform several notches better than anything they’ve produced so far this year. In their loss at Auckland players commented that they weren’t physical enough in contesting the ball at the breakdown which allowed the All Blacks to get back into the game and eventually take the game away from them. The Wallabies showed a lack of composure under the high ball at Auckland as well and their kicking game went missing.
Those were the two areas where SA excelled against NZ and as Steyn stated, they just fed off our mistakes. Australia will want to play the game more in the Boks half and will back their lineout against SA. Going on the matches so far I’m not expecting to see much thrilling attacking backplay from setpieces or counterattacks from either team. Cooper, Turner and Mitchell will be chasing kicks all day long.
August 6th 2009 @ 11:46am
Ziggy said | August 6th 2009 @ 11:46am | Report comment
Wallabies can win well if they keep ball in hand when they get it and throw it wide when they have a chance at scoring. Contest every lineout and make it messy for the Boks. Giteau is a priceless asset because he has the complete game and kicks well for territory from defensive positions. He is the best No 10 in the world by a long way.
Do not attack from own half – just keep possession until a better field position is achieved. Play the game in the Boks half.
Tackle everything that moves without let up. Do not shirk from the physicality – just as tough as them.
Wallabies have the players to cross the advantage line which the ABs could not achieve.
Needle Bakkies and Bismarck until they lose focus and give away a yellow card or maybe even a red. Certainly penalties will be gained. Du Plessis is particularly vulnerable.
August 6th 2009 @ 11:55am
Jameswm said | August 6th 2009 @ 11:55am | Report comment
By the way fox is right. Baxter is far and away the best tight head in the country, so until someone else stands up, he’s it.
Let me add that in the Waratah front row, TPN is in the middle, and he’s an absolute brute of a scrummager. I think that is part of the difference.
Not sure what side Caldwell and Sharpe scrum on, but how much support does Sharpe give his prop?
August 6th 2009 @ 2:22pm
AndyS said | August 6th 2009 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
Stand up where? There is no Aus A program, so no-one can put pressure on him there. He starts all the Tests, so that avenue is out. So that leaves club rugby – right, I’m sure a good performance against Eastwood would get someone a Bledisloe gig.
Like Dunning before him, he is the “best” because he has gotten entrenched in the position and benefits from continual Wallabies selection. So he goes back to the one place that a challenge can be mounted from, Super Rugby, looks better because he has been coached at the top level instead of languishing in amateur ranks, and it repeats again. But he is probably as good as he is ever going to be, if not past it. At what point is the potential behind him just being squandered?
August 6th 2009 @ 12:11pm
Terry Kidd said | August 6th 2009 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
Yeah James I’ve asked the same question re: Sharpe and scrummaging before. And you are right, I hadn’t figured TPN into the equation. Maybe he should start on Saturday night? Maybe we should have a front row of Robbo, TPN and The Fuze? Now if we subbed Caldwell for Sharpe we would also have two locks with a bit of mongrel who can also scummage. Maybe the Bok scrum would struggle against a pack with that tight 5?
August 6th 2009 @ 12:22pm
sheek said | August 6th 2009 @ 12:22pm | Report comment
James,
The Boks mightn’t be that good, but as OJ says, neither are the ABs & Wallas.
There’s an old truth about rugby, that stretches over 100 years. It goes -
While you’re constantly putting the pressure on the opposition, you don’t have to face up to your own weaknesses. The Boks & ABs do this consistently & historically better than anyone else.
August 6th 2009 @ 12:59pm
Rob McCourt said | August 6th 2009 @ 12:59pm | Report comment
This article on Peter de Villiers is the first sign that Australian media outlets may at last come to the realization that South African Rugby has done in all the circumstances a wonderful job. Journalists such as Greg Growden have led the charge in an approach of condescension and paternalism towards South African Rugby. If it was as bad as that group of journalists suggest it would no longer exist. But it does and South African Rugby is playing a better brand of rugby and are more successful than our good selves.
I am not South African but having been there a few times firstly in 1995 I have nothing but admiration for the job they have done in returning to the international fold and spreading the base of rugby as they have. Would we have been capable of the same. I doubt it. So the knockers can shut up.
And that includes the same belittling attitude to de Villiers. His natural language is not English. It is Afrikaans. He is not comfortable in English. Nor are we comfortable with Afrikaans. I am sure Robbie Deans can’t speak it. I am doubly sure our so called journalists can’t speak it. Furthermore there are cultural differences. This may come as a surprise to our journalists but the rest of the world thank God are not the same as you. They do not necessarily think the same way. They do not express themselves the same way. Those differences should be respected not mocked.
Peter de Villiers has a successful record as a coach at junior level. He presently has a successful record as an international coach. He started last year. His Tri Nations campaign was not great but it included a win over NZ in NZ and a record thrashing of Australia. Then followed a very successful spring tour. Two wins over the Lions and a loss with the second stringers. And a great start to the 2009 Tri Nations. He is from all objective reports well regarded by the team and his coaching staff. I suspect he is a very good coach. Remember this team does not have that many players who were not available to Jake White.
South Africa may or may not win this Saturday. They will however play with pride and aggression. Something perhaps we can work on.
So to the journalists and the rugby community I say grow up and concentrate on the rugby.
August 6th 2009 @ 1:20pm
Ziggy said | August 6th 2009 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
Well said Rob. I am not ashamed to admit I was hopelessly wrong in my assertion from a few years ago that the SA rugby board and provincial unions would never succeed in getting to make rugby popular among the Africans. They have , in fact, done a magnificent job. Those evil, evil Afrikaners!!! It is a revelation to see what has happened at schoolboy level and in great, once all white schools such as Greys and Glenwood. Some of the top schoolboy teams are more than 60% African! Unbelievable. And they desperately want to wear that Springbok jersey.
The average Australian has no concept of this achievement because they are fed a lot of biased and prejudiced racial claptrap based on outdated motives being ascribed to white Afrikaner players. Some journos here should be ashamed of their bias still rooted in the Apartheid era.
Same applies to Cricket – they even have a Captain who has stated he would never lead an all white team again. Not because of politics but because there are now so many deserving ‘non white’ players who deserve selection on merit.
And it has happened faster than anyone could have hoped for.
August 6th 2009 @ 2:04pm
Luc said | August 6th 2009 @ 2:04pm | Report comment
Does anyone actually still watch rugby??? Why do you all care so much? Anyone who views it objectively would admit that what we see now is a limper, paler version of what used to be the world’s greatest game. I can only assume you are all waiting for the worm to turn and for this collective delusion to end.
Guys, it’s okay to admit it to ourselves. Rugby is dead. Too much kicking. Boring scrums. Confusion at the breakdown. Vague refereeing interpretations. A public starved of tries. The best attacking players squeezed out of the game (Messrs Hewatt, Tuqiri, Burke). The rotating circus that has become the haka (“which one are they going to do this week?”). Should I go on?
Wake up Spiro and friends. I know some of you have a livelihood to maintain. Just start writing about something else.