Boks and All Blacks hunting for Grand Slams
By Saffhappy, 9 Apr 2010 Saffhappy is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- All Blacks, Grand Slam rugby, International Rugby, Ireland Rugby, Rugby Union, Springboks, wallabies
Related coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- International Rugby Union - Six Nations, Heineken Cup, Rugby Championship news
- New Zealand All Blacks news
- South Africa Springboks news
- 2013 Wallabies squad news
The All Blacks aren’t the only team looking to go four for four in November. The Boks are figuring how to pull off the same trick.
In fact, some rugby pundits, in both New Zealand and South Africa, are musing that it will come down to a competition between the two Southern Hemisphere teams.
Which of them can come away with the best points for-and-against record?
Of course, for both teams to pull off a Grand Slam, they’ll have to beat the cream of this year’s crop, Ireland, who always play good rugby against Southern Hemisphere sides.
It will be a first for Ireland if they can top the All Blacks, while they destroyed the ‘Boks at Landsdowne Road in 2006, 32-15.
Although Scotland came out ahead of the Wallabies last time out, nobody’s tipping the Scots to upset the All Blacks or the ‘Boks in November.
As for Wales, they’re formidable but not a team that’s gelling yet.
Their record against New Zealand is three wins out of 25 games, while they’ve beaten the ‘Boks once in 23 games. As a comparison – I hope Sheek, the forum’s resident historian, will give us the exact figure – Wales have beaten the Wallabies at least ten times.
Wales’ chance for a second win over the Boks will come June 5th when they’ll play what will be, in effect, South Africa A.
This is a game arranged for revenue and future favours.
The ‘Boks have to hold back many of their big guns for the game against France in Capetown, June 12. France have a good record against South Africa, winning ten to the South Africa’s 20, with six draws.
Any current ‘Boks who do make the slog to Wales and back will be mighty tired, one of the reasons the French are confident.
But it’s Wales who’ll be the most fatigued in June.
After they bust a gut to beat the ‘Boks on the 5th, they fly all the way to Auckland a day or two later. They play the All Blacks on the 19th at Carisbrook and again a week later at Waikato.
So the forum has already discussed at some length the chances of the mighty All Blacks pulling off a Grand Slam.
Let’s talk about the Boks and their chances of doing the same.
And if you’re of the opinion that both teams will do it, which will have the better for-and-against record?
![]()
Passionate about your union? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily union email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Where is Deans in the pecking order of rugby coaches? (407)
- Wallabies squad announced: Folau in, no Quade Cooper – yet (268)
- With Quade, Deans faces a real dilemma (249)
- Deans: Should he stay or should he go? (246)
- SPIRO’s Lions Diary: Deans goes for experience, plus Folau (242)
- Australia, time to get behind the Wallabies (232)
- Wallabies 25-man Lions squad: analysis (214)
- Where have the Australian franchises five-pointers gone? (59)
- Brumbies weather Blues storm in Auckland (7)
- Force pip Highlanders 19-18 in Perth (20)
- Dismissed Hartley in Lions doubt (17)
- Snarling Dogs rally for AFL win
- Stormers deny Reds 20-15 in Super Rugby (15)
- Stormers vs Reds: Super Rugby live scores, blog (238)
- Stormers vs Reds: Super Rugby live scores, blog (238)
- Western Force vs Highlanders: Super Rugby live scores, blog (175)
- Blues vs Brumbies: Super Rugby live scores (212)
- Has McKenzie cost Cooper the Lions Tour? (122)
- Does Quade Cooper really matter? (32)
- Rebels vs Waratahs: Super Rugby live scores, blog (415)
- Chiefs vs Crusaders: Super Rugby live scores (182)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- All Blacks, Grand Slam rugby, International Rugby, Ireland Rugby, Rugby Union, Springboks, wallabies


April 9th 2010 @ 3:32am
Wavell Wakefield said | April 9th 2010 @ 3:32am | Report comment
The Welsh problem is a lack of tactical variety, and a lack of playing depth.
Wales v Australia: 29 tests, 10 Welsh victories; 18 Australian victories; 1 draw
April 9th 2010 @ 5:49am
Thurston said | April 9th 2010 @ 5:49am | Report comment
Saffhappy you make no mention of England. Gotta be a massive typo on your part as your assessment if pretty fair all round. I believe England have beaten the ABs six times with one draw, the ABs posting 26 victories. Against the Boks England have done much better – 12 wins against 18 losses and one draw. I can’t see England getting into the win column against either team in November, but if Johnson picks some of the players he should have picked in the 6 Nations, including Foden and Ashton, England won’t be embarrassed.
April 9th 2010 @ 6:03am
Saffhappy said | April 9th 2010 @ 6:03am | Report comment
You’re right Thurston, it was a mistake on my part. I didn’t mean to leave England out of the equation specially as the team and its management are a source of frustration for a lot of people and there’s a lot of head scratching going on. Agree with your opinion re November. England won’t derail the Boks or the ABs but will certainly get in their faces.
April 9th 2010 @ 6:25am
Viscount Crouchback said | April 9th 2010 @ 6:25am | Report comment
Blacks – excellent chance.
Boks – no chance.
April 9th 2010 @ 10:43am
Sam said | April 9th 2010 @ 10:43am | Report comment
No chance? What odds are you taking? I might be interested in putting some money on it!
April 9th 2010 @ 7:02am
scarlet said | April 9th 2010 @ 7:02am | Report comment
Wales will cruel the chances of both teams to secure a Grand Slam……..I hope
April 9th 2010 @ 7:09am
Glad Fop said | April 9th 2010 @ 7:09am | Report comment
VC – I kind of think the Boks have slightly more chance than no chance. England have several under performers including Flutie and Wilko, Moyne, Armitage, Banahan, and some earnest plodders in the fowards – Bortho and Easter – while Shaw is too banged up to last through the second half. The Boks, on the other hands, will field a team comprised of an augemented Bulls side. There are no weaknesses unless you count Smit’s scrummaging, but he makes up for that around the park. You’ll see a different Boks team to the recent one over there because November’s too close to the RWC for them not to turn it on and send a message to the French.
SCARLET – it’d be nice to see Wales throw down a real gauntlet before the RWC, but they gonna have to reach back. Settle for them getting close to the ABs and the Boks.
April 9th 2010 @ 7:22am
Wavell Wakefield said | April 9th 2010 @ 7:22am | Report comment
Banahan doesn’t play for England. He gained five caps during the Lions tour and when England had 25 first team players absent during the Autumn. Armitage, Monye and Wilkinson didn’t feature versus France. Foden, Ashton and Flood all performed admirably.
Shaw can last games, it just so happens that he was injured during the 6N and shouldn’t have been playing at all.
There are no weaknesses in the SA pack apart from Smit? No SA props are dominant scrummagers, Botha is prone to being penalised and Spies still has yet to develop as an 8. This is no great SA pack. It has a wonderful lineout and a superb openside fetcher but crumbles when met with a similar force, as we saw during the Lions tour and versus France.
April 9th 2010 @ 7:28am
Viscount Crouchback said | April 9th 2010 @ 7:28am | Report comment
Let’s not resort to hyperbole. The Bok pack did not “crumble” against the Lions. It battered the Lions for sixty minutes in Durban, and came on stronger and stronger in Pretoria (hence numerous Lions left the field in the second half with injuries). If anyone “crumbled”, it was the Lions.
April 9th 2010 @ 7:34am
Wavell Wakefield said | April 9th 2010 @ 7:34am | Report comment
Absolute nonsense. Durban is irrelevant (although it is wonderfully informative that you only refer to 60 minutes) if you read what I said – ‘when met with a similar force’. In the 2nd test the Lions reduced the Springbok pack to a rabble. They made no ground whatsoever and were pushed backward in all phases.
Adam Jones was injured in a freak accident, Jenkins broke his cheekbone on the back of Habana’s head and Brian O’Driscoll injured himself when smashing Rossouw. That hardly confirms your stronger guff, VC. The SA enforcers were embarrassed: Mtawarira was manhandled by Jones, Du Plessis was invisible and the less said about Shaw’s performance the better. Know your history, VC.
April 9th 2010 @ 7:43am
Viscount Crouchback said | April 9th 2010 @ 7:43am | Report comment
Oh, come on, Wavell. You are, as ever, viewing the rugger world through northern hemisphere tinted spectacles. Go back and watch the second half of that match in Pretoria. The Boks start to make yardage in collison after collision, not least through Pierre Spies. The likes of Croft start to fall off tackles and concede the impetus to the Boks. That’s why the South Africans came back from a big deficit to win the game. It’s hardly “crumbling”!
I’ll accept two points. First, the Lions were magnificent, no question about that. Second, altitude must have played an important role in the Bok comeback. The Lions visibly wearied in the second half. I don’t doubt that you CAN stop the Boks if you stop them up front, and the Lions damn near managed it.
But that, Wavell, is a long, long way from making the Boks “crumble”.
April 9th 2010 @ 7:48am
Wavell Wakefield said | April 9th 2010 @ 7:48am | Report comment
I think they crumbled, VC. They were confronted with a pack that was technically superior and just as aggressive as them and they didn’t know what to do. Recall the scrum in the 2nd test (very close to the Lions try line): the packs engaged… and back the Springboks go. As soon as the geography kicked in and the injuries to the props then the Boks won the game. It is no coincidence that as soon as Rees and Jones came on during the 1st test that any SA forward momentum was halted. All it took was the introduction of two players. Just look at the third test. Yes, the players were different, but the same story played out, and that is why so many SH fans (obviously not SA fans) came away from the series crowing about players like Heaslip and Shaw and not Spies and Botha.
April 9th 2010 @ 7:54am
Wavell Wakefield said | April 9th 2010 @ 7:54am | Report comment
Hang on one second, VC, let’s make one thing clear: this isn’t a dismissal of the Springboks, it is a dismissal of SA forward play.
April 9th 2010 @ 10:08am
Rusty said | April 9th 2010 @ 10:08am | Report comment
History says 2-1 to the Boks. Must have been through the Boks magnificent back play. As the forwards were, as you put it rabble prone to crumbling to a technically superior opponent.
April 9th 2010 @ 2:43pm
Rugbywits said | April 9th 2010 @ 2:43pm | Report comment
I rekon the SA forward pack and the Lions forward pack were fairly similar across the 3 matches.Sometimes the SA pack had a bit more brute force but the Lions were great at grinding away that advantage.
The problem with relating this to the grand slam chances of the boks is that the Boks were 1 country. The Lions were a couple.
Id say the Boks forwards wont have the same stuggles against each team individually.
The Boks back play is about being very efficient usually. They dont waste a whole lot of chances.
What Grand Slam team will be as assured at the Boks that they will get points on nearly good opportunity?
I dont rekon any of them.
If I was to suggest a way for a UK team to beat the boks this year it would be absolutely snot Steyn from the start so he cant kick. That might get you over the line… just.
April 9th 2010 @ 2:56pm
rem said | April 9th 2010 @ 2:56pm | Report comment
Rugbywits – I don’t feel the fact that the Lions were made up of a couple of countries is an advantage rather a disadvantage. Where as the Boks play together year in and year out, and know each other well, the Lions don’t, coming together for only a short period every few years.
April 9th 2010 @ 3:26pm
Rugbywits said | April 9th 2010 @ 3:26pm | Report comment
Rem, yeah that could be a good point. Synergy.
But dont you think that itd surely be better to have 8 players picked from the whole of the UK than just 1 country?
Maybe not. That is an interesting point.
The way its taken Rocky Elsom some time to gel with his new Brumbies team mates would suggest that even if you are a good player how you link up with your particular team mates is vital to your own efforts.
Having said all this, am I right in suggesting you believe that each individual UK nations forward pack has a better chance of matching the SA one?
April 9th 2010 @ 9:47pm
pothale said | April 9th 2010 @ 9:47pm | Report comment
The Lions are made up of two countries – Britain and Ireland – but also four different unions. Getting them to gel together in a short space of time, when they are drawn from four different test sides and approx 8 different clubs is going to put them at a disadvantage compared to the Boks or other opposing country who have an established test side. In part, that’s why Geech went for existing combinations whenever he could either at club or country level.
Regarding each individual forward pack, there’s other contributors who can talk more expertly on that topic. But I wouldn’t assume that a dominant Bok pack will guarantee them victory. It didn’t against Ireland.
April 9th 2010 @ 7:25am
Viscount Crouchback said | April 9th 2010 @ 7:25am | Report comment
I say “no chance” not because I don’t rate the Boks – I rate them very highly – but because the brainless oafs at SARU have saddled their team with yet another ludicrous fixture schedule. I expect half the team will travel around the UK on crutches. The Blacks, on the other hand, tend to be rather better managed by their administrators.
April 9th 2010 @ 10:23am
Rusty said | April 9th 2010 @ 10:23am | Report comment
but VC how else are they going to get that new fleet of mercedes? the 2009 model is so..so.. last year
April 11th 2010 @ 3:30am
nicksa said | April 11th 2010 @ 3:30am | Report comment
vc
I agree 100%, i am a huge bok supporter and at the moment i do believe the boks are the best team in the world but i feel it will be to much for the boks to achive a grandslam…
April 9th 2010 @ 8:02am
Viscount Crouchback said | April 9th 2010 @ 8:02am | Report comment
If recovering from a 19-8 deficit on the hour to win 28-25 constitutes “crumbling” in your eyes, Wavell, then we’ll probably have to agree to disagree.
April 9th 2010 @ 8:46am
Wavell Wakefield said | April 9th 2010 @ 8:46am | Report comment
It’s the manner of victory that counts. You know what I have written above makes a great deal of sense, VC.
April 9th 2010 @ 8:21am
Glad Fop said | April 9th 2010 @ 8:21am | Report comment
Very good, VC and WW – we all enjoyed the friendly bickering. Now can we get back to the original post? I take it,VC, that you’re predicting the ABs to go 4 and 0 and the Boks to go
3 and 0? 2 and 0? And WW, Banahan didn’t play for England even when he was playing for England. Flood is barely of international quality in the NH, wouldn’t make the bench in the SH. Spies yet to develop? What, that old roll from his Box Brownie?
We’d all like England to improve out of sight because the stronger they are the better the RWC will be. But November is too soon for an England 15 to be good enough to stop the Boks who’ll have the metal to the pedal this time.
April 9th 2010 @ 8:31am
Colin N said | April 9th 2010 @ 8:31am | Report comment
I don’t quite understand this Flood bashing. He was the fly-half when England played their best rugby under Johnson, was England’s fly-half when England actually looked threatening in this six nations (aka France). He out-played the highly-rated, and in my opinion, over-hyped Trinch-Duc, as well as regularly playing well for his club side.
As for Banahan, he has only played for England when they have had players missing, e.g the Lions and the Autumn series.
April 9th 2010 @ 8:47am
Wavell Wakefield said | April 9th 2010 @ 8:47am | Report comment
Try again Glad Fop:
‘Banahan doesn’t play for England. He gained five caps during the Lions tour and when England had 25 first team players absent during the Autumn’.
Have you even watched Flood … ever?
Have you even watched Spies … ever?
April 9th 2010 @ 9:50am
Glad Fop said | April 9th 2010 @ 9:50am | Report comment
WW – yes I have watched them both although at separate times. I watched Flood a few weeks back as he was getting out at Goodge Street. When he walked down the platform he was moving his left arm in concert with his left leg. Clearly a nice guy but hardly a man I’d want running a back line. And I watched Spies once in Marks & Sparks. He bought a cardigan. He wanted red but you know how they are, they only had brown.
But you’ve probably seen them both on a rugby field so you’d have a better grasp of their prowess than would I.
April 9th 2010 @ 10:22am
Ariki said | April 9th 2010 @ 10:22am | Report comment
So if you have not watched them play rugby but only seen them on the street, how are you in a comfortable position to give them commentary? you need to watch the rugby matches really if you want to post comments its only fair.
April 9th 2010 @ 10:24am
Rusty said | April 9th 2010 @ 10:24am | Report comment
I would take the comments to be tongue in cheek – everyone knows Spies only wears Bulle blou
April 9th 2010 @ 10:22am
Rusty said | April 9th 2010 @ 10:22am | Report comment
I see the ABs adding another GS to the ever growing list. The Boks will fail again most probably at the Irish hurdle while looking turgid and lethargic through the entire tour. The saving grace will be to wallop England at Twickenham giving the miliions of Saffas living the UK monday bragging rights