Contrary to the dictates of my conscience, I posted earlier four reasons why the All Blacks would suffer defeat at the hands of the Springboks in their final Tri-Nations duel at Port Elizabeth.
As a fervent All Blacks man, I’d prefer to be eating my words right now. But not so. Well done the Springboks.
God knows you needed the win more than we did.
Now, without diving deep into post-match analysis, here are seven home-truths (in no particular order) that emerged after 80 fairly frustrating minutes of rugby, for both nations.
1. This South African XV is not capable of winning the Rugby World Cup 2011.
In the absence of renewed enterprise in terms of game-plan and personnel, this team has shrunk to the lowest common denominator, which is baseline set-piece efficiency and the boot of Morne Steyn. The fact that the Boks couldn’t cross for a single try against a makeshift New Zealand B-team is telling. Coach de Villiers will be gone by Christmas.
The Franks brothers, Dan Carter, Richie McCaw, Kieran Read and Ma’a Nonu would have mopped the Port Elizabeth floor with this Springboks side.
2. All Blacks No 10 Colin Slade is still a long way off Cup-ready.
Dan Carter’s deputy was expected to be well beyond the kind of stage-fright suffered on South Africa’s main-stage.
The fly-half’s nerves manifested in all manner of unforced errors – off the tee, off the boot and with ball in hand. Coach Henry is in too deep with Slade’s selection to ponder alternatives. But they’ll be doubly prayerful Slade’s services are not exclusively required in the business end of the pinnacle tournament.
In saying that, Slade will be much the better man for this experience. How much better will remain an unknown. Next time he fronts it’s do or die.
3. Israel Dagg must start at No 15.
Full respect to New Zealand’s seasoned incumbent Mils Muliaina. But on the strength of this performance (and that’s all that is required), it would be criminal to have Dagg’s unrivalled attacking flare and technical excellence sitting idle on the sideline.
Dagg was devastating. He is a loosely arranged defensive-line’s worst nightmare. Imagine the potency behind a full-strength scrum and backline. Dagg has picked up where he left off prior to injury and renders Mils second-best.
4. Adam Thomson is no No 7.
Granted, Otago’s super-loosie has been a revelation this season. But his proficiencies end where the open-side begins. The gangly stand-in was most notably exposed and outmuscled in the breakdown area, which is unacceptable for the wearer of the No 7 jersey. Notwithstanding, Thomson justifies selection in the broader sense as insurance cover for numbers 4-8.
5. Sonny Bill Williams will make the cut based on brand and potential, but not form.
Sonny Bill’s Port Elizabeth performance at least confirmed that Ma’a Nonu owns majority stakes in the No 12 jersey by a considerable margin. With ball in hand, Williams was as tentative as the No 10 inside him but did his best to shake the nerves with some devastating defense.
The success-rate of his 50/50 offloads reduces relative to the quality and intensity of opposition. The big man must however be credited with some deft touches, including the nifty inside-ball to Hosea Gear that created the Richard Kahui try.
6. Select television match officials must be tried and proven.
Not local school teachers called up as late replacements, as was the case for Johan Meuswesen who denied the All Blacks a legitimate try. Ok, dynamic Dagg’s offload to Jimmy Cowan was arguably forward.
In ruling, Meuswesen correctly informed referee Clancy that Cowan had grounded the ball. However, part B of his ruling alluded to the preceding ‘alleged’ forward pass, a domain technically outside of his perimeters.
Clancy took the ruling on board and subsequently denied Cowan his 5-pointer. Dagg told Coach Henry afterwards it was a line-ball, which is clearly how ref Clancy and his touch-judge saw it. But for Meuswesen’s meddling, it should have been granted.
7. In terms of the final composition of the All Blacks Rugby World Cup squad, there is no wrong answer when it comes to the wingers department.
All contenders have put their best foot forward and equally justify selection. Isaia Toeava and Richard Kahui have compounded selectors’ headaches by turning in quality performances against the Boks. While cobwebs were evident for both players, it is to be expected in their first 80-minutes back. Yet both are only a touch off their formidable best.
According to Graham Henry in post match commentary, his selection panel was anticipating a long night pondering the merits of each and every contender.
The squad is expected to be finalised within 24 hours and then players informed accordingly. For observers, selection results should be fairly obvious. It’s hard to hide a broken heart.
And then on Tuesday, the general public will learn exactly who Henry has mandated to end New Zealand’s 24-year Rugby World Cup drought.
Ben S
Roar Guru
No, no, my friend. The aforementioned qualities are vital... But in conjunction with other qualities, qualities that SA don't possess. Their defence is simply too weak overall, they lack strength in depth in key positions, they lack a Plan B (as they had in 2007), and their offence is borderline disastrous. As soon as SA meet a strong pack with a sound set-piece then they will have no platform to work off.
Tony
Guest
The Springboks have failed to score a single try in 160mins of test rugby on their home grounds even when playing their A team against NZ B ( who bombed at least 4 try chances ) , they have no clue in the backs and simply wait for penalty or dropped goal opportunities for Morne Steyn. If thats all they can bring to the table just cant see them progressing very far.
cinematic
Guest
Why would the 2010 results be less meaningful than the 2009 results?
Mungehead
Guest
Some strange choices coming up, the NZ media are saying Sivivatu and Gear are out, and Guildford is in. Say what? Also Afoa will be chosen over Crocket. And Vito will get Messam's place.
Loftus
Guest
O.K. everyone - this is usually the time of the World Cup year when all the rest of us must sit back in awe and listen to all the Kiwis about how wonderful their team is and how unbeatable they are.They never lose,there is always an injustice or someone else at fault.Also,no team can call themselves World Champions if they haven t beaten the All Blacks(fairly) in that specific World Cup.Let s just send the World Cup to New Zealand and present it to the All Blacks.There s really no need to continue with the tournament,there s already a winner,again.
Rugby realist
Guest
''''A line-out, good scramble defence and a big kicking 10 won't win a WC.''''' That is exactly the type of game that CAN and has been dominant at a world cup. You have described a formula that on its day is very had to combat. Sadly its just the nature of the tournament. I hope they do not, but to say that formula wont win a WC is wrong
Ben S
Roar Guru
Sooo... SA beat a NZ 2nd string which contained some players who haven't played high level rugby in months, show no attacking ability whatsoever, and are, at times, ripped to shreds by this NZ side, and yet they display WC winning ability? Crap rugby isn't the same as cup winning rugby. The SA side in 2007 had Eddie Jones, and they actually had the ability to play some rugby. A line-out, good scramble defence and a big kicking 10 won't win a WC.
Nathan
Roar Pro
Yup, they have to select SBW now. Lot of money spent to put pressure on Ma'a but seems to be working. By the way wasn't the whole reason for TMO's being used was to confirm/deny whether a try has been scored? His job is to confirm the grounding. How hard can it be? Why did he even bother to mention the forward pass? The referee got it wrong twice, once for missing the forward pass and secondly for ruling incorrectly on TMO's judgment that was not part of his job description.
Nathan
Roar Pro
Agree Ivan. Predicting South Africa to beat France in final
Seiran
Roar Guru
'In the absence of renewed enterprise in terms of game-plan and personnel, this team has shrunk to the lowest common denominator, which is baseline set-piece efficiency and the boot of Morne Steyn.' Haven't they been like this since at least 2007? Either way, they still have a good chance of winning the WC with this game plan.
Sylvester
Guest
Not sure how the AR missed it myself. He was right in line, plus Dagg was stationary when he passed, so no "drift" involved. It was a howler from all three.
Joshy Homes
Guest
How would the All Blacks have mopped the floor with the Boks? I think you're forgetting that this is only the 2nd game for this Bok side. This bok side is also finally resembling the all dominant 2009 side (and we all remember what they did to the Abs 3-0) You seem to be taking the 2010 results and B team sent over this year as meaningful. Look I hope our Wallabies do it this week because it in my eyes at least will inspire horwill and I can see Horwill and genia drinking beer from bill now can you? I can can you??! GO YOU GOOD THING!
Sylvester
Guest
Before everyone freaks out about Slade's underwhelming performance, let's consider that should he replace an injured Carter in a key game at the RWC (touch wood), he'll have all the experience around him that he didn't have the luxury of in this game. I'm sure it would have been a calming influence to have the likes of Read, McCaw and Smith on the field against SA.
Ivan
Guest
Boks reverted to finals rugby in both matches at home. Against Aus they didnt have the puff to keep it up for 80. Against NZ they didnt make enough first time tackles. To refer to the boks as being in trouble because they couldnt score tries shows how little you know about the Springboks. Was Habana not the top try scorer in the World Cup of 07 ? The boks will revert to trench warfare against the 2 teams we know we cannot out run in backline moves. its boring but effective. NZ's A team will suffer the same defeat to SA. Purely because the pack will be monstered again, and Steyn will kick the goals. SA only needs to beat NZ once in the WC. NZ will opt for their entertaining game, high risk high reward - but when the boks apply the pressure - its hard to maintain your focus. Only a handful of kiwis can handle that pressure and turn it around. Boks will take the WC unless NZ can beat their pack. which is very possible. But Aus wont match them, the winner of this WC will be either SA or NZ - with NZ being the more likely.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
You've got to feel for Cruden and Slade. To be thrown into Tri-Nations matches like that is a tough ask. Carter didn't have that sort of pressure heaped on him when he was starting out. Slade has looked okay off the bench, but I'm not sure what his long term future will be. Carter will play for at least another couple of years and after that we could go through a period like the post-Fox years. Everyone wants Slade to be 1995 Merhts but it's not going to happen.
Patrick
Guest
Have we learned nothing..... There is nothing to say the Boks can't win playing this game. It will be 930pm on a wet dewy night. I think they have as good a chance as NZ and Aus. If they knock out us in the semi, i think they would have the game to beat Aus. I think you are foolish to write them off.
Awesome
Guest
Fourie Du Preez is the key to SA's creativity. When he fires, the tries will follow.
Je Geniko
Guest
Well said Jerry.
Jerry
Guest
U need 2 wk on yr reading comprehension. I'm against refs & officials ignoring the laws of the game. And let's be honest, a large part of the reason people are supporting the TMO is cause the decision went against the AB's. Imagine if the roles were reversed and a ref & NZ hometown TMO had conspired to deny the Boks a try against the AB's? We'd never hear the bloody end of it - "CONSPIRACY!!! Paddy's got all the ref's running scared, no one dares to rule against them...."
Je Geniko
Guest
Pieter van Zyl