The strip worn by the England rugby team is the modern version of the battle dress worn by English crusaders of the twelfth century, so it was ironic that they were crushed by an Australian team bearing all the hallmarks of another bunch of Crusaders – the Canterbury version.

So many times in recent seasons, teams in the Super 14 have dominated the Canterbury team early, starved them of possession, pressured their line and scored a try or two, only to find that when the smoke had cleared at the 80 minute mark, they had blown it.

The Crusaders, under now Wallaby coach Robbie Deans, just had a knack of winning tough tight games. They would control the forward battle, soak up the pressure, remain calm when behind on the scoreboard, cover defend and then take their opportunities. The result was an opposition that cracked in the last 20 minutes and succumbed to the pressure of having a team constantly punishing their mistakes.

This Test was so much in that vein, that England manager Martin Johnson might have borrowed his after-match script from John Mitchell, whose Western Force side have frustratingly made an art form out of getting close to the Crusaders in the Super 14 without winning.

“Today we have played a team who are away from home, at the end of a long season, and who have won a Test match by 14 points – and they’ve known how to win a Test match.” said Johnson. “They knew how to accelerate at the end of the game and score that try that put the game away”.

“From our point of view we had plenty of opportunities, we were in that game territorially and possession-wise, but we haven’t turned that into real, clinical try scoring opportunities”.

The perplexity on Johnson’s face was obvious and his heavy brow betrayed his frustration.

As many Super 14 teams do against the Crusaders, his England side made all the running in the first half against the Wallabies. They had the lion’s share of possession and territory, and Australian fans were entitled to feel that it was possibly just a matter of time before the Wallabies set-piece crumbled and their option-taking went west.

But instead, it was England who lost their composure at the ever present Wallabies. There is something spooky about a set of footsteps following you down the street at dusk, never getting closer, never getting further away. After a while they get under your skin.

And Australia got under England’s skin. As they kicked their penalties, and ticked over the scoreboard, the English options, particularly through Cipriani, became more grotesque. His horror attempt at drop goal with the Wallabies under pressure was a trademark play from a player spooked by footsteps over his shoulder.

Although the Wallabies had little ball of their own in the first half, they were dogged in their efforts to slowly turn the screws on the English side. Cipriani’s excellent break at quarter time was cut down by committed, organized cover. Drew Mitchell, focused like a laser, ran through a loitering Armitage on a kick chase. The England scrum was wheeled, collapsed and confused, if not yet dominated. And Paul Sackey was reduced to the scatterbrained play of standing over Burgess, hopelessly offside, while the ball emerged from a ruck.

After halftime the story was much the same. Mortlock gave an excellent impression of a dump truck crashing through a paling fence, when he clobbered his way through two England tacklers at 44 minutes. Nathan Sharpe charged down a kick and continued to pursue Cipriani to his own in-goal with an admirable chase. The Australian scrum then turned on the pressure on the England line and the human water-buffalo Andy Sheridan was unbelievably penalized for collapsing.

This was the continued story of a match where only two tries were scored, but which was nonetheless intriguing. Australian supporters were treated to the unusual (in recent years at least) sight of a Wallaby team remaining calm in the face of adversity and gathering themselves to deliver the coup-de-grace.

The death knell came for England in a four minute period immediately after the 60 minute mark, the entry point into that part of the game which might aptly be referred to as the “Crusader quarter”.
At 61 minutes, Mortlock crashed into England’s best back Riki Flutey, and then planted him in the ground like a new season petunia.

At 62 minutes, maligned prop Al Baxter led the Australian scrum to a rock-solid engagement which bemused the England pack in the same way that you might be bemused to lie down on your bed and find that your pillow had turned to cement.

At 63 minutes, Benn Robinson demolished the England scrum driving up and across. Robinson’s tactic was probably borderline-legal in this instance, but England/Australia Test matches are no place for the faint of heart, and like his countryman Harry Morant before him, Robinson simply applied Rule 303.

And at 64 minutes, Mortlock tonked home a long range penalty, after which the game was gone for England. The Adam Ashley-Cooper try simply confirmed what everyone at the ground already knew.
The Crusader quarter was closed out by the Wallabies to great effect, showing that the Deans fitness regime has paid off. In the final five minutes, Al Baxter made two open field tackles and was chatting constantly in the defensive line, and Benn Robinson buried some poor unfortunate returning a kick from the England half.

Therein lay the secret to the Wallabies victory. Where in recent times they have often been like Marlon Brando (looks substantial, but is actually pretty erratic), on Saturday they were much more like Robert de Niro(quite consistent and often threatening). Their defence was punishing more often than not, and their set-piece gave them a platform to exert pressure, even though they had limited ball.

England fans will argue that their team was their own worst enemy, making some 30 turnovers, but enough pressure will cause errors among even very good teams.

The Wallabies are not yet a great team. Far from it in fact. Their newly-sturdy scrum is yet to be fully tested, and their kicking game and options are light-on at times. They are also limited in attack as long as they choose to use inside-centre-natural Matt Giteau as a sole playmaker.

But against England, away from home, three weeks into a laborious tour and with questions marks over their set-piece, they finally showed their Wallaby coach the sort of Crusaderesque heart, work-ethic and composure needed to win tight Test matches.

He must be pleased. After all, who could ask for more than that?

Dateline: Hong Kong, present day. Well, a couple of days after actually, and again we’re ruing the one that got away. Again. Again. Again. How to explain the Hong Kong experience? It’s a bit like ditching your down-home Aussie girlfriend for a hot Swedish backpacker.

It all looks really sexy and exotic, but when you get down to it, the moods, the mystery and the nagging are all pretty much the same.

Taking the Bledisloe offshore is a nice idea, especially for the bank balances of the relative unions, and you can’t blame them for that. We definitely need the dough.

But if you’re talking about developing rugby as a result, it ain’t really happening. Well, not among the locals anyway.

I had the happy and enlightening experience of standing out the front of Hong Kong Stadium waiting for my associate, Dr Samuel Nixon, who was in possession of my ticket. As the thronging crowds passed, I ran into several old mates who pulled out of the main current flowing past to spend a few moments chatting in my side eddy.

Enlightening, because it brought home the message that 95 percent of the crowd were Aussies over from Australia, Kiwis in town from New Zealand, bro, and expats from both countries, plus Poms.

I could have counted the number of Asians on one, maybe two hands, and I saw more rugby mates in two hours than I have at a footy game for as long as I can remember.

I was actually supposed to be at my twenty year school reunion, but it didn’t matter. Hong Kong was one big reunion. From my seat alone I counted about five acquaintances within chatting distance.

The point being that the crowd was fully transplanted, and the real targets for growing rugby in Honkers, the Chinese, just didn’t care about it.

My cab driver to the Stadium didn’t even know it was on.

Given the spectacle to which we were treated by our Irish friend with the whistle, it was probably just as well, since if they had seen the game and thought “this is rugby,” we wouldn’t have seen them for dust.

I must say that watching a game from the stands for the purpose of writing about it is a tough gig and if I was given my druthers, it is ten times easier to write a column after seeing the game on TV. You have the advantage of commentary, slow-mo replays and a sturdy desk to rest your laptop on.

Saturday night (not having taken advantage of a media pass), I had none of these and so resorted to recording voice notes on the recorder on my mobile phone.

Given that my colleague, Dr Nixon, and I had availed ourselves of the refreshments on offer pre-kickoff, these notes revealed an amusing series of emotions as the game progressed.

The early recordings were brim full of righteous pride. As half time approached, an indignant tone infiltrated the speakers.

After half time, the volume and pitch of my recorded voice indicated significant disgust. And the final minutes are doused in despair.

Without going through the game play-by-play, my overall feeling was that Australia was punished several times for “infringements,” which had little or no impact on the game at all, such as Brown falling through a ruck on cleanout.

Despite their enterprise, they had little to show for it, courtesy of a string of penalties awarded against them, meaning that the All Blacks had several free shots at goal and a rash of territory to stay in the match.

This is not the All Blacks’ fault, by the way.

Obviously you take the decisions as they are awarded to you. It is also not an argument that Australia was never at fault – doubtless they were at fault for some of the game.

But I do find it exceedingly hard to believe that one team was so consistently and solely at fault for such a large part of the game. At one stage we were effectively being asked to believe that the Wallabies had so far committed nine times as many infringements as the All Blacks.

Yeah, right.

There were bright spots: Richard Brown was regularly in the thick of things, being aggressive all the while. The scrum was solid, and it is interesting to note that progress appears to have been made in that arena quite rapidly since the announcement of Michael Foley’s move to the Waratahs.

George Smith’s no-look pass to put Drew Mitchell over was a thing of beauty, and Mitchell made the most of his opportunity. He will be the first choice winger for the next Test, if only because of his desire to get involved.

As an old touring mate of mine used to say, Luke Burgess “did what’s in his contract” and kept the ball shifting from the scrum and ruck with urgency and enthusiasm. From the grandstand, the consensus of Dr Sam and several other pundits in the vicinity was that he was the popular vote for man-of-the-match, although that was unlikely to happen for a player in a losing side.

Overall, what the Wallabies showed was enterprise and we should be proud of them for that as there have been several dark days in recent years where even that quintessentially Aussie ingredient has deserted them. One day soon, our youthful combatants will learn to close out the tight ones when things aren’t going their way.

When that happens we’ll have cause to smile.

Well, they’re calling my flight, so the next time you hear from me, it will be back on home soil.

Was the trip worth it?

As I say, it all depends on your point of view. There’s nothing wrong with a bit of foreign flirtation to spice things up from time to time, but if you’re looking for a lasting relationship, it’s sometimes better to start a little closer to home.

Over and out.

The recent controversy over the Springbok emblem has dragged South African rugby back into the ever-present political mire.

Despite the success of the Springboks in winning two World Cups, breaking their duck in New Zealand, and achieving a record score against the Wallabies, it appears that on-field triumph is not enough turn eyes away from the race-based divisions which always seem to haunt them.

As an outsider, it is difficult to understand the true depth of feeling which the Springbok emblem engenders across South African society.

So to get a sense of what the feeling is like on the ground right now, I called up a Springbok who played several years of Test rugby in the 1990s.

His view?

“It’s not just about rugby now, it’s starting to become an issue across many sectors of society. The Springbok emblem has affected many people in different ways and all of a sudden it is becoming quite personal between some of them.”

So personal in fact that he preferred not to be named for this column, because (as he put it) “a lot of ex-players and current players are extremely nervous to get involved in an issue like this because whatever view they take will probably be frowned upon: either keeping the emblem, or not keeping the emblem.”

“It’s in the news, of course, but you don’t see any players or ex-players saying anything, because it is such a fickle topic for discussion. It’s a hell of a sensitive topic in South Africa at the moment. The guys are very nervous to take any stance. The contracted Springboks and even the ex-Springboks, particularly the black players, feel that they are damned if they do comment, and damned to an extent if they don’t.”

Despite the sensitivity of the topic, his views were clear.

“It’s a rugby emblem, it’s about rugby. There’s a lot of history behind it, but it’s not a symbol of apartheid or anything like that. There are plenty of guys from the previously disadvantaged backgrounds, or from the black communities who would love to play for the Springboks you know? You go to the Eastern Cape and it is one of the biggest breeding grounds for black rugby in South Africa.”

One particular comment had echoes of one of the great Springbok captains from days past.

“There are far more deep-rooted problems in South Africa than the Springbok emblem, let me tell you. And these guys just say, well, let’s get rid of this now and everything will be better. But it won’t.”

The legendary Paul Roos made a similar statement after a Swansea tour match in 1906 as he led the first touring Springboks through the UK.

“There is something much deeper than football beneath this tour, and that is wiping out memories of our divided past,” he said.

Ironically though, the “divided past” to which Roos referred did not exist as a chasm between blacks and whites, but rather as a divide between the white Afrikaaner and the white Englishman following the Boer War, which had concluded in 1902.

Roos apparently addressed his team before they left Africa, stating that, “I can only lead willing men, and I would like to make absolutely clear at the outset that we are not English speaking, or Afrikaans speaking, but a happy band of South Africans.”

This may have been a noble sentiment, but it was undoubtedly a big ask given that several of the players had actually been on opposing sides during the Boer War.

Forward Sommie Morkel had been among four thousand Boer prisoners taken after the Battle Of Pardeburg when General Piet Cronje surrendered to the English General Lord Roberts, whilst two of Morkel’s teammates, loose forward Billy Millar and centre Rajah Martheze, had fought against him in the loyal Cape and Natal Forces who opposed the Boer republics of Transvaal and the Orange Free State.

Indeed, South Africa still comprised four separate governments in 1906, and it would not be until 1910 that they became one country.

Disunity seemed to be a way of life for South Africans, and South African rugby supporters.

Vere Stent, editor of the Pretoria News, may have disagreed when he wrote around this time that “South Africa is disunited about every subject under the sun, but in hearty agreement when supporting our rugby team.”

But for most of last century, this “hearty agreement” only extended so far.

For most of the previous century, rugby was still an overwhelmingly white sport, dominated by the South African Rugby Football Board (later the SARB), which was established in 1889 to cater exclusively for the white section of the population.

Other populations were forced to establish similar organizations (under several differing emblems) to administer their rugby, resulting in the formation of the South African Coloured Rugby Board, the South African Bantu Rugby Board, and the South African Rugby Federation.

Of these, only the white SARB was affiliated with the International Rugby Board. The rest were denied affiliation with the SARB and, as a consequence, any affiliation with the IRB.

The administrative boards used a variety of symbols.

The SA Coloured Rugby Board displayed the king protea as the dominant feature of their emblem. The South African Bantu Rugby Board’s emblem comprised the continent of Africa with a standing springbok imposed over it, and the colours were predominantly black trimmed with gold.

The South African Rugby Federation (a Western Province breakaway union) emblem was a cluster of three proteas in natural colours. And they became known as the Proteas.

Only the all white, IRB affiliated, SARB team took to the field with the leaping springbok, the green and gold colours, and called themselves the Springboks.

As a result, the emblem could easily have been seen as a symbol of white exclusivity.

As Archbishop Desmond Tutu once said, “for a very long time, the Springbok emblem represented exclusion to the vast majority of people in South Africa. For so many, it was a hated symbol that epitomized the racial policies of injustice and oppression that characterized the system of apartheid.”

But he went on to say, “as a contribution to the process of reconcilitation in our country, we should not rub people’s noses in the dust. We should take very seriously what they regarded as their symbols and badges, in the spirit of nation building.”

Tutu’s sentiments were echoed by my Springbok contact.

“It’s easy to target the Springbok symbol and say that it’s a symbol of the apartheid era and we need to get rid of it, and then say that rugby has changed forever and it’s the new South Africa and the new rugby. But it’s not like that. Instead of taking down a symbol, why not invest more money and effort in the grassroots and focus there. Then you will change rugby in South Africa.”

“These guys are asking for these changes, saying that South Africa will never move on from the past if they don’t change the emblem and that’s the argument that has to be changed. There was a day and age when black rugby players weren’t allowed, but those days are gone. Springbok rugby over the last 20 years, or since Mandela’s release, has been part of that whole changing process. And it’s been a massive success. There are more kids playing rugby now than ever before, especially in the black communities. It is almost a fully representative side these days. We’ve won two World Cups under the new government.”

The healing of relationships was a common theme for both men in the idea of retaining the Springbok as the emblem of South African rugby.

Our Springbok said, “for me, if it goes, it will be sad to see it go. I do understand that we are in a changing country, a changing environment, and if the majority of the country says that the emblem should go, then who am I to say any different? But I do believe that there is merit in keeping the Springbok emblem and that it has a major role to play in the future of South Africa both on and off the field, particularly in terms of reforming damaged relationships from the past.”

Tutu made a similar point in 2006.

“We have got to say that something extraordinary happened when we won the World Cup in 1995. The fact that the victory was celebrated in Soweto was an extraordinary thing, and testifies to how incredibly sport can help heal a broken nation.”

So despite the divisive influences, there appears to be hope for the future.

My phone conversation to South Africa ended thus: “For the future, I think it is important that some sort of tradition and history is respected and kept within our country and Springbok rugby is one of them. I’m a firm believer that it’s not about the old days. The Springbok teams that I played in were all about opportunity and all about everyone having the chance to play for the Springboks. I only ever saw the Springbok emblem in one way, and that was as a symbol for the country.”

“It will be a continued challenge to keep it. The one thing about the Springbok though, it has survived through times of turmoil and through the good times as well, and hopefully it will continue to do so.”

For the sake of our shared rugby history, the good and the bad, let’s hope that it endures.

Those who would argue in favour of Tahu’s retention for the Brisbane Bledisloe Test match would do well to check out the video once again, remembering some important tenets of defence.

To have a positive effect as a defender at inside centre, one needs to push up hard off the line on the attackers inside shoulder, and make dominant tackles. The challenge is not to push up so hard that you become unbalanced, allowing attackers to step around you; or push up out of the line, leaving holes around you where runners can make breaks.

You also need to avoid pushing up hard on the attackers outside shoulder, inviting runners to come on a hard unders line back inside you.

Secondly, you need to trust the men around you and not come in on tackles which have already been made. Sevens players learn this lesson very early – that committing to a tackle which is already made by another player is to leave your defensive line a man short.

Third, when rejoining the defensive line, particularly close to your own line, you must join quickly close to the ruck and allow defenders already in the line to shuffle outwards, thereby maintaining the integrity of the line.

Poor defenders circle deep behind their line to a position midfield, thereby taking themselves out of play for the time it takes them to get along behind their own line to that position.

With these tenets in mind, let’s have a look at the Tahu game as it will likely be analysed by Camp Wallaby.

Ten minutes:
Conrad Jantjies takes a long pass and goes outside Wycliffe Palu who makes the tackle. Timana Tahu steps in and goes over the top of Jantjies who is already falling, Tahu is not required for this tackle. Mortlock correctly stays out on the winger and Ashley Cooper covers the possible kick through at the back.

When Tahu goes in on Jantjies, he leaves Mortlock stranded, and forces Mortlock to make a desperate attempt at Bekker who surges through the Tahu-left gap and scores. If Tahu had stayed on Bekker, Mortlock had the winger covered safely with Ashley Cooper as backup.

Twelve minutes:
Nokwe scores a second try through a simple overlap which is the fault of the collective defence. However, from the initial scrum, Giteau tackles Spies and Tahu again needlessly comes over the top, becoming stranded on the left side of the ruck, and leaving a gap which is immediately exploited by Juan Smith on the right, giving the Springboks momentum which they ultimately use to score.

Sixteen minutes:
Wallabies make a breakout which ultimately leads to the Tuqiri fumble following a poor pass from Peter Hines. In the beginning, after several Springbok phases, Tahu makes an ineffective tackle on de Villiers which fortuitously causes de Villiers to fumble the ball. Tahu should have stayed out and supported the backline. Instead he goes in and joins a ruck where he is not required and is not part of the subsequent Wallaby attack.

Twenty six minutes:
The Wallabies are under severe pressure on their own line following a poor scrum. Pierre Spies takes a wide-ish pass from the ruck and is half tackled by Tahu before being finally put down by Dunning and Giteau. During the ensuing phase delay, Tahu gets to his feet and cruises around behind the defensive line towards midfield.

The Boks recycle the ball leaving Mortlock and Ashley-Cooper to scramble across 4 Springbok attackers in midfield.

The reason Tahu appears in cover as Nokwe scores is that he was never a part of the line in the first place. There is little point in corner flagging when your team is 5 metres from its own line – Tahu should have posted up immediately on the right hand side of the ruck and taken the first attacker, but his league instinct tells him that he has time to get around the back of the line because the tackler will hold the attacker down until the defence is set.

Unfortunately, in rugby the contest for the ball meant that he was beaten to the punch.

Thirty six minutes:
Burger makes a break from the lineout and is stopped but not grounded by Giteau and Tuqiri. He passes out to de Villiers whom Tahu misses badly. Mortlock is forced to come in and tackle de Villiers leaving a massive overlap which the Boks exploit to score again through Nokwe.

The original error appears to come from the Wallaby forwards who didn’t cover Burger adequately, but the compounding factor was the missed tackle on de Villiers. Had Tahu made the tackle, momentum would have been halted, Giteau would have been in the defensive line, and Mortlock would have been able to stay out on his man.

Forty four minutes:
The Springboks are under pressure having gone backwards from a lineout, but then gain an advantage following an Australian knock-on. Playing through the advantage, they feed their backs and Tahu drifts slightly as he comes up slowly off the line.

The gap is created partly by his drift which allows de Villiers room to step inside him, and partly by his slowness, which creates a break in the line between Tahu and (a player who appears to be the blind winger) Hines, defending at first receiver.

De Villiers accelerates through the gap, leaving Hines to make the tackle and allowing Jacobs a clear run which he takes to the tryline.

Not long after this Tahu is replaced by Ryan Cross.

It would be churlish and ignorant to suggest that Tahu was somehow wholly responsible for the Wallabies poor showing, because that was not the case. However, there are some positions where the impact of mistakes are magnified.

Lineout throwing is one. Fullback is another. And inside centre is the most obvious of all – there is nowhere to hide.

Timana Tahu is a talented rugby player. He is big, strong, skilful and fast. But the subtleties of defence in the centre, either inside or outside, are not learned overnight.

Positioning, footwork and spatial awareness are all strengths of the great rugby tacklers, and ones which several league players have struggled with in the past when they convert.

Even such polished league players such as Andy Farrell and Henry Paul were reduced to journeyman class when confronted with the complexities and variety in a rugby union attack.

For Timana Tahu, Johannesburg was a master class in Rugby Union Defence 101. Time will tell whether he learns the lesson.

In the African movie The Ghost and the Darkness, which chronicles the hunting and killing of the man-eating lions of Tsavo in 1898, engineer John Patterson discusses his attempt to kill the big cats with hunter Charles Remington. “Have you ever failed?”, asks Patterson. Replies Remington, “Only at life.”

After last weekend’s victory to Australia, a similar answer could describe the Springboks attempt to kill off the Wallabies.

Did they fail? Well, only at rugby.

It was evident to all who watched, including the booing home fans, that this Springbok team lacks confidence, regardless of the denials from the coach.

They failed to convert pressure into points several times during the Test against Australia, made more than a dozen handling errors, kicked aimlessly, lost a number of their own lineouts, and missed fourteen or fifteen tackles.

Perhaps, these stats could have been excused as just a team having a bad day. But the instances of foul play tell the real story.

When you look back at the last ten years of Springbok Test matches, it becomes clear that South African teams lacking confidence in their ability inevitably resort to playing the man.

In 2001, French coach Bernard Laporte criticized English referee Chris White for not being harder on the Boks after three players were sin-binned for foul play during the French victory. Mark Andrews particularly was cited for headbutting Fabien Galthie.

France won 20-15.

In 2002, a horror November Test at Twickenham contained the following laundry list of offences: third minute, Robinson punched by Krige after late tackle; tenth minute, Dalton punches Dawson; twelfth minute, Fleck punches Cohen; twentieth minute, Robinson hit off the ball by James; twenty-third minute, Labuschagne sent off for late shoulder charge on Wilkinson; thirty-fifth minute, Krige penalized for a late hit on Hill; fortieth minute, James punches Dawson.

After half time, if possible, things get worse.

Forty-first minute, Wilkinson out of game after James shoulder charge; fiftieth minute, Greef knees Back; fifty-fifth minute, Krige headbutts Dawson; fifty-eighth minute, Krige knocks out his own man Pretorius with a swinging arm intended for Dawson; sixty-first minute, Greef concedes penalty try following dangerous tackle on Christophers; sixty-ninth minute, Krige elbows Johnson in retaliation for being held in a headlock (perhaps justifiably, given Krige’s game up to this point); and finally in the seventhy-fourth minute, AJ Venter headbutts Richard Hill in the face.

Clearly not focused on rugby, the Springboks are defeated by England 53-3.

In 2003, two Springboks were charged with foul play following a match that Australia won.

Robbie Kempson shoulder charged Toutai Kefu while his back was turned, and Wallaby hooker Brendan Cannon was bitten and then eye gouged by Bakkies Botha.

Botha was suspended for eight weeks, Kempson for four. Australia won 29-9 and Australian coach Eddie Jones branded the Springboks a “f**king disgrace.”

Of course, Springbok fans argue that their team is no dirtier than any other, but at least one insider suggests otherwise.

In his book Springbok Rugby Uncovered, former Springbok communications manager Mark Keohane said: “Since 1992, the Boks have done themselves no favours when it comes to being branded the thugs of Test rugby. The facts are damning. In the decade since readmission, the Boks have been involved in at least one match a year marred by fighting or ill discipline. During this time, Bok players have been sent off, cited and suspended for indiscretions ranging from punching to biting to kicking to swearing at the referee.”

He goes on to say, “The Boks are not necessarily dirtier than any other side, but they must be a lot dumber as they always seem to get caught. Statistics from 2000 to 2003 attest to Bok brutality. In forty one Tests leading into the 2003 World Cup, the Boks had twenty players yellow carded and two red carded for ill-discipline. The opposition in these forty one Tests lost only ten players to yellow cards.”

So what? The Boks are prone to foul play on occasion. That’s not really news is it? Nup.

The interesting part is the correlation between the Bok’s confidence and the amount of foul play they mete out to the opposition. That is to say, the better they feel they are playing, the less they play the man and vice versa.

The drubbing by England in 2002 was accompanied by what can only be described as carnage. At the other end of the scale, during the 2007 World Cup victory, a squeaky-clean South Africa conceded only three yellow cards for the tournament, which incidentally went to Francois Steyn, Bryan Habana and Juan Smith – hardly a trio of enforcers.

When the Springbok team’s ability to play constructive, positive rugby disappears, they appear to lose confidence and start trying to bash teams out of the game. The on-field violence acts as an indicator of how much confidence they currently have in their rugby.

Last weekend, feeling threatened at home and having been soundly beaten by the All Blacks just a week before, the Boks came out at Durban lacking a clear match strategy, and minus two of their strike weapons in Bakkies Botha and Bryan Habana.

As the lost opportunities mounted up and the errors increased, the Springboks began to play the man.

CJ van der Linde threw himself forward into a ruck to headbutt Sam Cordingley. Butch James’ tackles drifted higher and later. Van der Linde again was noted by a linesman for shoulder charging a stationary player caught in a ruck. And finally Schalk Burger reeled out of a ruck pursued by a cranky George Smith, whom he had grabbed on the testicles.

Smith could be clearly heard on the referees mike chastising Burger. “Well, if you want to grab my balls, then of course I’m going to blow up. That’s not your go, Schalk – you’re a better player than that.”

For his part, Burger looked sheepish, as if he too knew he was better than that.

The signs were all there of a team frustrated and lacking a clear direction, in contrast to their opponents the Wallabies, who had the direction, even though they weren’t always able to execute consistently.

Much of the early kicking was aimless, Cordingley’s service was scattered, several passes were pushed when the ball should have been held, and the Wallabies missed seventeen or eighteen tackles – meaning that for every 3.5 or so successful tackles, they missed one outright.

But they still managed to deliver by sticking to the plan and patiently working through the rough patches.

Horwill and Smith made crucial steals on Springbok ball, Stirling Mortlock scored a magnificent solo try, Rocky Elsom generally worked as though he was being paid by the metre.

Matt Giteau delivered his best kicking performance yet in general play, and importantly the Australian set-piece was solid, even allowing several steals on Springbok lineout ball.

What can we expect in Johannesburg?

The Boks are down and rattled. They have conceded two Tests in a row at home and have a coach who doesn’t inspire, or articulate, confidence.

Their replacement “form fullback”, Conrad Jantjies, had a shocker, the week after their centurion Percy Montgomery also had a barry and got hooked. Aside from Tendai Mtawarira and Adrian Jacobs who kept their team in the game, there were few Boks who inspired much confidence.

The likely return of the ghostly Bryan Habana may not be enough to stave off the darkness.

The Wallabies will have confidence after their win, and can still field a winning side, thanks to Robbie Deans’ willingness to give game time to his bench.

Most importantly, they have learned a valuable lesson through the foul play which reveals the fragility of the present Springbok psyche.

The time to be anxious about the Boks is when they are playing rugby – not when they are playing the man.

After two weeks of no Test or elite rugby above premiership level, we finally make it back to some top level Tri-Nations competition with Australia playing.

The Wallabies take on the Springboks this week, and I do some solo analysis on that one since my wingman Mat Collett was flat on his back with an old rugby injury. Or so he tells me.

I didn’t think 5/8ths got injured, but that’s a whole other debate! The Wallabies haven’t tasted success in the Republic since 2000, but there are a few reasons why they might change that this weekend, especially if they can manage the Springbok scrum. The Wallaby team is named today, so we’ll also get to see how close I was with my team predictions.

We also went down to see Sydney University play Warringah under lights at University No 1 on Saturday night. The game was a little underwhelming after the Rats great success against Randwick, but I had a good chat after the game with Wallaby Mark Gerrard which you can see here.

A big show next week with the post-Test analysis and a preview of Wallabies vs All Blacks in Brisbane.

The Roar Rugby Review is sponsored by BigPond® ADSL2+ Broadband. Find out more now.

There was no access to the studio this week so we took advantage of the break to get outside and film in the fresh air of Hyde Park in Sydney.

Watch episode seven in the series

The sun was out, the birds were singing, and it was the sort of day that would give the bleakest of Wallaby supporters cause to think that they might just be able to run down the Bokke in the Republic on Saturday week.

Of course, before that happens we are hoping that the All Blacks give them a bashing and soften them up for us, so we look at the teams for the Springboks - All Blacks clash this weekend.

Also, after giving you all a taste of Matt Burke’s views on the ELV’s last episode, we serve up the rest of the catchup this week, including a couple of gems on what it’s like to play with Tim Horan, and against Jonah Lomu. Burkey is one of the greats, and also a pretty funny guy.

While Mat was chatting to Matt, I got over to Balmoral and checked out the All Stars game for the Mosman Junior Rugby 50 years celebrations.

The All Stars included Richard Harry, Phil Kearns, Tim Wallace, Ross Reynolds, Jason Little and Tony Dempsey among others and fun was had by all. There is some footage of the game as well as a couple of celebrity interviews. Everyone had a great time, although a few of the dads who played had sore knees and heads on Monday!

The post game celebrations were old school….tinnies on the grass while the kids kicked goals, just like it used to be.

Lastly, there’s a quick wrap on the Shute Shield and also NSW Suburban rugby just to keep you up to date. After the massive Warringah win over Randwick, the top 5 race in the Shute Shield is wide open, and it will only get more intriguing in coming weeks.

We’ll keep you posted in future issues of the Roar Rugby Review – the rugby show for insiders.

The Roar Rugby Review is sponsored by BigPond® ADSL2+ Broadband. Find out more now.

Invariably, the penalty would lead to a kick to touch and the chance to regroup, reform the defensive line, and perhaps even win an opposition throw. That, or a penalty shot by the opposition resulting in a worst case scenario of 3 points, or a best case scenario of a miss and a 22 dropout putting you back on attack (albeit briefly).

The point is that under the old laws a breach in the opposition advantage line wasn’t always sustainable, particularly if it wasn’t clean into space. The laws ensured that the momentum often faltered quickly, leading to a situation where teams aimed to play a million or so short phases, reluctantly shifting the point of attack no further than midfield, concentrating on ball security and wearing oppositions down. In short, boring rugby.

The ELV’s have created a situation where all of a sudden momentum is sustainable for attacking teams, and defending teams are forced to halt that momentum with sheer physical brutality.

Last Saturday, the All Black philosophy of attacking the advantage line at every opportunity paid off like a pokie jackpot, gifting them a glittering gush of possession in attacking positions and releasing their backs to tear the Wallabies apart in midfield.

At the ruck, the All Blacks simply smashed their way over the advantage line with the same vicious intent of the Tartars sacking Jerusalem. On this performance, those who feared that the ELV’s would lead to a smaller, faster player should take heart, since the damage was done by the big men – Thorn, So’aialo, Williams, Woodcock.

The Wallabies lacked desire and poundage to combat this strategy, and the loss of Rocky Elsom was more significant than anyone realized. Phil Waugh has a heart the size of a blue ribbon pumpkin, but against a backrow as big and intent on mayhem as the All Blacks, the two flyer option proved to be optimistic.

The Wallabies scrum was far less assured than previous weeks, and again the All Blacks attacked the advantage line. They may not have made much ground, but the half-metre to a metre that they made was enough to put their defending backs on the front foot, where they used the pressure to good effect, rattling Giteau to the extent where he felt late in the game that the chip kick was the only option.

In defence, the New Zealanders simply bullied the Wallabies backwards. Their line (from both set play and kick chase) surged forward like a line of bighorn rams, bashing the Aussies and stopping them dead, before flooding the ruck with frothing maniacs – So’aialo being Exhibit A.

Again the advantage line was the key to it all – the Australians didn’t get over it, and so even when they kept the ball they were forced to play backwards to gain some space in attack.

The All Blacks’ ownership of the advantage line equalled pressure and indecision in Camp Wallaby, as evidenced by the massive turnover rate and the significant number of missed tackles. Even a defensive line as impregnable as the Wallabies’ finds it near-impossible to organize effectively on the back foot and this in turn magnified both the pressure on them and the momentum of the Blacks.

What the ELV’s have done is reward the team who dominates the advantage line, because the momentum they gain is no longer questionable, but inevitable. And unlike in the past, there are fewer shortcuts back from the dark side. The only way now to halt that momentum is through a massive turnover tackle, or by flooding the ruck with big men to smash the opposition off the ball.

Whilst the game may have become less physical in some areas, the physical confrontation required to dominate at the breakdown is bone-shattering, and if possible, Test rugby has become more, not less, of a collision sport.

The ELV’s too, far from creating a hybrid player, are actually reinforcing the specialist roles of backs and forwards. The forwards are as physical, if not more so, than they have ever been, and the fast running, classically evasive backs (eg Peter Hynes, Conrad Smith) are making a comeback.

The All Blacks learned the hard way against the Wallabies in Bledisloe I that the advantage line was the key to winning games under the ELV’s. They used that lesson to devastating effect in Auckland.

Now that both sides know how to win, and how to lose, the battle lines are clearly drawn.

Stand by for advantage line fireworks in Bledisloe three.

Watch episode five in this video series

Jim holds the record for the most tries in a Wallaby tour match, a record which he set in 1962 with a massive six porky pies in one game – let’s hope the Wallabies can score half that many this weekend.

Mat and I also have a look at some of your comments about last weeks Test, spend a bit of time looking at next weeks game at Eden Park, and run through some club and country results and standings – we’re dead keen to see whether the Narromine Gorillas can come home with a wet sail.

For the naysayers amongst you, I managed to get through the whole show (almost) without mentioning my 15 point prediction – but if you come up to the Oaks at Neutral Bay tonight from 5.00pm and meet me in the John Mellion Bar, I’ll be happy to talk you through it!

Enjoy the show.

The Roar Rugby Review is sponsored by BigPond® ADSL2+ Broadband. Find out more now.

Vin and Chris borrow a shotgun, commandeer the hearse, drive up the hill through sporadic gunfire and confront the villains who, after a brief standoff, back down and allow the burial.

The classic quote from the scene comes from Chris who has the end of his cheroot blown off by gunfire whilst driving the coach. As the shot dies away, Vin asks “You get elected?”. Chris pulls the shattered panatela from his mouth and peruses the frayed end before answering. “No – but I got nominated real good”.

Saturday night’s Wallabies also got nominated real good, but managed to guts out a significant win through a series of Vin-and-Chris-like tactics – a willingness to take on the tough jobs; composure under fire; and the mettle to stare down an opponent who seems to hold a lot of the cards.

The frantic first 20 minutes of this Test match was old-school Bledisloe, and for the first time in years, fans who elected not to make the trek to Homebush were regretting their decision. A near capacity crowd, combined with sweeping running and brutal defence, made for the spectacle that Australian rugby fans have been waiting for.

The malevolent defence started in the first minutes, when the resurgent Lote Tuqiri continued his defensive rout from last week, and again when a hard running Ma’a Nonu was stopped in his tracks and spilt the ball.

In the second minute, Wallabies supporters were rubbing their eyes when the Aussies elected to take a scrum in an attacking position from a free kick. After 4 minutes the Wallabies had been pressuring the All Blacks consistently into mistakes and by the 8th minute Brad Thorn was desperate enough to earn himself an unlucky yellow card through a high shot on Giteau which was careless, but not malicious.

The pressure at this stage was on the All Blacks and it continued this way for much of the night, with the Wallabies continuously pulling off big plays when the occasion demanded, despite Carter and Sivivatu regularly, and sometimes successfully, testing the defence.

Almost every Wallaby had a play to remember. Tuqiri’s run to set up Cross’ try was reminiscent of the Tuqiri of old, and his defence was regularly dangerous. Adam Ashley-Cooper knocked himself silly in a tackle in the 12th minute, but only seconds later arrived in cover to hammer another All Black attacker and stop a promising move.

Al Baxter made a crucial counter-ruck which led to an Australian penalty and had several supporters wondering if this piledriver was the same guy they had been writing off for the last 3 years.

Nathan Sharpe, another Wallaby who at times has been anonymous, again arrived when the going got tough. He carried over the advantage line several times, and was a crucial link in the lead up to Cross’ try.

Matt Giteau made several important plays but perhaps none more so than his field goal with ten minutes to go which put the Wallabies 8 points out. The look on Giteau’s face as he high-fived Cross on the run back was indicative of the situation – he was clearly pleased, but the joy was tempered with a fierce resolve. It was obvious that he knew the job was not yet done, and the Wallabies now had to shut the game down.

Rocky Elsom turned in his usual high standard game and scored a typical hard-running opportunist try. George Smith was again outstanding, and caved in Andy Ellis’ ribs with a hit that dropped Ellis like an empty suit of clothes. James Horwill bloodhounded his way to another Test five pointer. Cross was solid filling in for the champion Mortlock. Burgess improved his pass immensely and gave quality service. Benn Robinson tackled like a backrower, and Steven Moore was obstinate, if not flashy.

However, in mentioning the Wallabies, I’m saving the best till last. Berrick Barnes was simply awesome, having his standout game in the Wallaby jersey, and certainly vindicated Deans’ “extra five-eighth” policy with some judicious kicking and ball distribution. But that wasn’t all. Barnes’ defence was brutal, which is not a word often used when describing the hits dealt out by a man who weighs in at some 87 kilos.

Fans of both codes would remember names like Paul Taylor and John Kolc, rugby league small men who tackled beyond their size. As the great Jack Gibson once said “It’s no use being big if you can’t play big”. Perhaps you could also say of Barnes “You don’t need to be big, if you can play big”.

The All Blacks? Predictably, Dan Carter was the go-to man, and very nearly rescued his team from the jaws of defeat. Several times he broke the line, only to be pulled down looking desperately for support. His sole runner was the explosive Sitiveni Sivivatu, who shadowed Carter all night and ran hard into holes, being unlucky not to get better results at times.

The most obvious difference between this All Black side and its predecessors was twofold. First, it lacked ball security, and although the Australians were deserved winners, they can be thankful that the All Blacks turned over ball at crucial times, relieving pressure. Second, the ruck contest was far less brutal than we have come to expect when the likes of Richie McCaw and Jerry Collins are on duty.

Where to from here? If Australia can maintain the desire that underpinned their massive defence and adventurous running, they must be in with a show of winning the Tri-Nations. However, they are about to play the All Blacks at Eden Park, and then South Africa at Kings Park and Ellis Park. These are tough assignments, on the road and with in front of fiercely partisan crowds so the Wallabies have a long road ahead.

Which brings us back to Vin and Chris.

Vin: “It reminds me of a fellow back home who fell off a 10 story building”. Chris: “What about him”. Vin: “Well, as he was falling, people on every floor kept hearing him say, so far - so good. So far - so good”.

It’s the same for the Wallabies. There’s a long way to go, but so far - so good.