I am a die-hard All Black fan from South Africa, as I have previously highlighted. But now that the dust has settled following the defeats in South Africa, I think all and sundry have to accept that the Springboks are the best at the moment.
Debate rages over whether they are a great side.
Well, I think it’s all in the stats – they speak for themselves. If they are beating teams the way they have, in fact since the World Cup, they have to be a great team. We whinge about the laws, the uninspiring rugby they deliver, but the playing fields are hopefully made level for everybody.
It’s not the Boks who make the rules.
They, like all their rivals, surely should just play to them.
The constant up-and-unders are one dimensional and are a right old bore to watch, but then again they have made their strengths work for them.
I think it was Jake White who came up with the rush defence tactic that worked for them in the World Cup. Now many other international sides are adopting a similar defensive pattern.
If teams, who in this day and age have access to a myriad of technological aids and top-heavy management teams, cannot work out the opposition, they should just accept defeat and move on.
After a few years of being propelled back into the hurly-burly of international rugby, South African Rugby, has learned from the mistakes of the past and has definitely put the pride back in the Boks.
Schools rugby has a solid platform, so too Craven Week, University competitions, the local competition, and the Currie Cup, to mention a few that have ensured success in Super 14 and for the Test side.
Many of this current team has played in the U21s together and De Villers, since taking over the reins as coach, has got himself a special team indeed. Winning like they say is about momentum.
The Boks may not be a great team, but they know how to win and have the momentum going with them.
David
Guest
Ah, quit whinging about the ref! Stop the youtube video at 4:52 and you will see that The AB's lock is down on the ground not bound to anyone, #8 is standing over him also not bound to the scrum which is off to the right. The ball wasn't in a scrum when Du Preez picked it up. No doubt, the ref also said, "Ball's out," and if you look at the other camera angle, he very clearly puts his arms out. In any event, that's the way the ref called it and that's all that counts.
Gerrard
Guest
End of the day, for this year so far the AB's and Aussies suck RIGHT. Yep no debating that point i guess!! All the arguments are from people that have the bad loss syndrome. Just drop the crap and swollow OK. WOOOSAWWW and rub the ears. Kiwibok
QC
Guest
Srum turnover my jacksy the ball was taken out of the scrum
QC
Guest
I was going to ask the same thing Ben J but you beat me to it :-) This argument is getting oh so boring guys maybe it's time we all hugged and moved on. We all no South Africa can score tries I do have to agree with Ivan and David on that point however I am highly disgusted that Du Preis (excuse spelling) had to cheat to set up Steyns try by taking the ball out of the scrum. The Boks still would've won but blatant acts of dishonesty like that don't do much for some of the arguments going on in here at the moment. Yes we can be selective as we like boys there's been some extremely dodgy calls in rugby throughout the year but hey it's life time to move on
QC
Guest
Jerry yes I did miss the 99 game, and I did say in matches played at world cups not titles so I think I'm right in saying that france have a better record against us in that regard. As you say the 3rd place playoff noone really wants to play that now do they
QC
Guest
Ha ha classic, I wonder if they'll give him an accomodation supplement to help out with costs at the Hilton
Ben J
Guest
Oh blimey, what the hell is "organic ball"? Sounds like a Dilbert invention.
Joseph
Guest
Tri-nations is hardly an alley and everyone has seen.....plus hardly worth the effort when your not playing all the best players at the same table, you win THAT pot then are schooled by everyone again.... the following day....hmmm yeah great alright!
Ivan
Guest
a great team knows how to keep their heads when ALL the money is on the table. Great teams win world cups great teams have BMT If Tyson fought Holyfield in a alley where nobody was looking and beat him 5x in a row, good stuff... and then they fight for the title belt in front of the whole world and holyfield wins... then my friend, Holyfield is seen as the champ, You make a WC sound so irrelevant and worthless, convenient for your team right ?
Joseph
Guest
Ahhh David me thinks you need to read my original post again as you are being a wee bit naughty mis-representing it. Read again friend as I say the CURRENT game plan not that SA has only the one game plan. But yeah PDV does only have the one game plan for NZ. AND Ivan your assertions re your insistence for WC success to be central to defining a great team holds little merit in a knockout context safe in the knowledge you will be in the semi's before breaking a sweat. Surely to find out who was the greatest boxer between Ali or Frazier / Holyfield or Tyson you pick over 5 consecutive fights......... OR just the one? The latter more convenient for you huh?
Joseph
Guest
They wont! Habana will be able to apply for the dole such will be his unemployment status.
Joseph
Guest
...errrr...... like I care what game plan the Boks employ against some Northern ensemble! The Boks ONLY have the one game plan against the AB's. Structured, conservative & suffocating 10 man rugby and yeah it is working for you until we and the Wobblies start to match or surpass your tight5 and/or set piece dominance. Everything flows from here doesnt it? Halves with that extra time & space, loose forwards on the "front foot" as opposed to their heels ahhhh rugby nirvana huh? What must be frustrating Habana though is "with all this front foot ball why the hell am I only chasing kicks"? Furthermore I think you are reading a wee bit too much into my post there David as there is no reference to favorable refereeing? By christ! heaven forbid if the game actually loosens up a bit and the dots aren't connecting WHAT DO WE DO NOW BOET?? Sorry to digress chaps but YES! SA does only have the one game plan for NZ and for the benefit of Ivan re Spies about to drop kick! I would not be surprised as that would be less foreign to him and your backs than scoring a try or two against NZ.
Jerry G
Guest
They've actually played 3 times, 2 wins to SA and 1 to NZ. I think you must have forgotten the 1999 3rd place "Kissing your sister" playoff, but in actual competition matches it's 1-1. Technically SA have a better record than France vs NZ in World Cups, but in competition matches France have the edge (the overall NZ v Fra record is 2-2 but one of the NZ wins was in the 03 3rd place match).
Colin N
Guest
The argument is that the Boks have an uninventive backline. The fact that South Africa have scored a couple of tries from set-piece doesn't suggest otherwise, and neither do the ones I described above. I love watching tries from 'pre-organsied routines,' but it doesn't take that much brilliance or inventiveness, and it definitely doesn't dampen the criticism of the seemingly oblivious South African backline.
Knives Out
Guest
David, If I take back the comment 'SA has scored the majority of their tries from set-piece play', then I'm sure you will be able to point out the various holes in my argument that the SA backs have looked totally inept when presented with random ball, and why the Australian scores from a set piece indicates that they have far inferior backs to SA. You can do that right? Btw, 3 tries from SA during the Lions tour came about from the set piece. I'm sure that you can work out that percentage comes in around 60%.
Knives Out
Guest
You're debating semantics here. My original argument was that the SA backline struggled when not spoon fed a playing scenario. None of the tries contradict that. Not one.
Knives Out
Guest
'What, are you now restricting yourself to the Tri-Nations only and saying you’ve shown 50% of the tries were pre-organised? You said 2009 not just the Tri-Nations. I believe the rule is put up or shut up my friend. Give us a list of all of the Bok’s 2009 tries and explain why the majority were pre-organised, then contrast against Australia. As far as the Tri-Nations goes, please explain how any of those tries came from “pre-organised” routines. Why don’t you start with the Steyn try. Are you suggesting the Springboks pre-organised for the AB’s to lose their put-in?' I believe that the rule is put up or shut up which leaves me astonished as to why you are still here. I said that the SA backs looked slow, bereft of wit and obvious when presented with non- routine ball, i.e. with organic ball. None of the tries you have listed, as Colin N so forcefully confirms, refute that position. In fact, the only try that involved any intelligent play from the backs (Fourie's try against the Lions) only occurred because the Lions were missing their centre partnership. If anything that score adds to my argument. Lastly, I have referred to the Australian tries three times. I refuse to give you the same answer four times. This is a very simple equation and you are making it very difficult and embarrassing.
David
Guest
So we agree that none of the tries were from set pieces, none from "pre-ogranised routines". I agree that some of the tries are not the prettiest I've seen but that's not the point. The criticism KO levelled at the Boks actually applies far more to Australia who have scored the vast majority of their TN tries from set pieces.
David
Guest
"I’m sorry for being wrong by 1%" What, are you now restricting yourself to the Tri-Nations only and saying you've shown 50% of the tries were pre-organised? You said 2009 not just the Tri-Nations. I believe the rule is put up or shut up my friend. Give us a list of all of the Bok's 2009 tries and explain why the majority were pre-organised, then contrast against Australia. As far as the Tri-Nations goes, please explain how any of those tries came from "pre-organised" routines. Why don't you start with the Steyn try. Are you suggesting the Springboks pre-organised for the AB's to lose their put-in?
Knives Out
Guest
I'm sorry for being wrong by 1%, David, although it is worth noting that you have completely ignored most of what I have said and persisted with the same arguments that I disproved, and now you seek a debate over 1% as opposed to actually admitting that I am right and have been since my first comment, which you decided to oddly misinterpret and manipulate in order to be argumentative. Perhaps I should be so forceful and go over all of your mistakes, although I'm sure that would take far more time than they deserve. Colin pretty much finished you off a long time ago, so while you're still here quibbling I don't know.