- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Being coach of the Springboks is a poisoned chalice. No South African coach has managed to remain past his original four-year contract.
I can’t remember any South African coach leaving their position on a good footing with the South African Rugby Union.
In the 18 years since the advent of professional rugby, only two coaches have managed to retain their position for a period of four years, Jake White and Pieter de Villiers.
The Springboks’ longest-serving players have coincided with the tenures of White and de Villiers, with a number of them still around today under Heyneke Meyer.
Many would argue John Smit, as inspiring a leader as he was, had overstayed his welcome by 2010, when Bismarck du Plessis made a name for himself. Bismarck has gone on to be regarded as the best hooker in world rugby.
Players such as Fourie du Preez, Bakkies Botha and Victor Matfield started their professional careers under Heyneke Meyer in the period when he was coach of the Bulls.
Under each of these coaches a specific game plan was employed, the success each of these coaches stood by was a solid set piece, control taken from the nine position, chasers under the high kick, forcing opposition into mistakes and pouncing on those mistakes, little rugby is played from within your own half, and if all else fails take your kicks at goal.
Of late however, the Springboks have moved on to a more modern, ball-in-hand approach, hence the increasing number of tries was scored during 2013, which again coincides with one of our most successful seasons.
However when you ask Meyer, he will tell you that nothing has changed, the same game plan is still employed, and it is only the execution that has improved.
I beg to differ.
The Springbok set piece will always be the foundation of their game plan, but which team in modern day rugby does not need a solid set piece to be successful?
Although the set piece has and always will be a Springbok mainstay, there has been a definite improvement in their breakdown play. Call it heads up rugby if you will, but compare the struggles of the Springbok pack during the 2011 Rugby World Cup with the manner in which they’ve managed their breakdown ball in recent times.
In previous seasons there was no willingness or ability to adapt during the match situation. Were the 2011 Rugby World Cup quarter final played today, the result at the breakdowns would have been totally different.
With quicker ball comes more opportunities to attack, defences have less time to organise and can be caught off guard, granted scramble defence is now more important than ever.
The Springboks have played with more confidence in attack, the one-off runner ad infinitum has made way for shifting the point of attack. Although not as prevalent as with the All Blacks or Wallabies, the offload previously was like the coming of Hayley’s Comet.
Perhaps it is only the attitude that has changed, the willingness to be a little braver with ball in hand, or perhaps being a little more expansive. However you view it, it certainly has made a difference.
Heyneke Meyer is adamant that the success of the Springboks lies in the old guard, the same players Pieter de Villiers suggested “had a fear of failure”.
The concern is that these old dogs have not managed to beat the All Blacks in four years, so what is going to change?
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.