Who has the most to lose in the Rugby Championship?

Yeah, but let's be realistic; you might want that, but do you have the players to do that? IMO SA immediately looked a classier side with Du Preez at 9. Hougaard just doesn't have it, and Reinach is untested. At 10 Pollard has lots of potential, but he's basically the South African George Ford - looks great on the front foot, but can he cope when things don't go his way? We don't know. Morne Steyn has shown glimpses of being able to mix his play, but he's not the player he was in 2009. SA haven't had a fly half who could play flat and throw out dangerous long balls since Butch James. The centres are big lads, but not massively threatening. If the Boks can't get their maul going then they don't look threatening in the middle of the field. I still fancy them to beat NZ in SA, but through traditional strengths rather than anything new.

BenS, I don't think any of us want SA to play like New Zealand. We all agree we need to play to our strengths. What we are however advocating is a nine which provides quick service, a ten that can attack from standing flatter and variation by not challenging channel one all the time. Just some variation at the point of attack with the odd offload into space. We know we don't have the skills NZ or OZ has, but we do have pace and power, in order for that to be effective you need quick ball and at least some surprise in the line of attack.

Harry, I've said countless times that I think SA should play to their strengths, and trying to play like NZ isn't one of their strengths. Get big men down the middle, recycle quickly and then have more big men coming on to flat ball at pace. Last year Australia were in a horrible place. They developed hugely after the RC, and after McKenzie had had more time with the side. This isn't the same Australia from last year, and I don't see any huge improvements in SA, especially wit Fourie du Preez absent. If I'm wrong then fair enough, but it's fair to say that every season the Roar sees the same old comments about these new Boks who are going to do this and that, and by and large it's the same old soup served up - which is not necessarily a bad thing.

Ben, I have missed your comments, it is something that can be debated forever plus a day. ;)

Yes, I know--wasn't trying to mix and match positions--was saying as a corps, I don't think the stereotype of Aussie creativity versus Saffa bashball is valid narrative for this head-to-head group. Le Roux comes in at first receiver a fair bit. See the June tests to watch how Meyer is using him. He gets plenty of touches; and can sometimes impose himself on a test. (Also makes errors). Quade Cooper and Kurtley Beale and JOC and Genia would be who I think of as creators for OZ. AAC would make my team any day; but he and JdV are just honest hard running tackling rugby old school. SA is scoring buckets of tries, man. May not fit the conventional narrative, but look at the last 18 months, for real.

AAC has played outside centre all season, and will likely be deployed on the wing. Why compare him to an inside centre? Whether or not Le Roux is any more creative than any of the Wallaby backs is subjective, but as addressed above, SA do not work him into the game. His creativity shines through counter attack. Toomua can play 10 and he can kick. JdV can't play 10, and we know he's not going to kick. He's a good player undoubtedly, but he runs hard and straight. Kuridrani is a big man and he can off-load. Nic White is a kicker. Nobody would claim otherwise, but he can perform his core duties, which is more than Hougaard, and as much as I admire Pienaar as a playmaker, he is misused by Meyer. Where has this tier one nation 'stat' come from? Honestly, one good season against Australia out of the past few, and it's the usual hyperbole. When have we ever seen SA perform against Ireland and Wales like Australia did last year?

Ben S Good to hear from you again Are you indulging in a bit of myth making? (Mythology is important and the word myth is not pejorative) Myth 1: OZ backs are more creative than one trick SA ponies. The most creative back on the field will be Willie le Roux. I love AAC, but isn't he very similar to JdV? Hard-running strong-tackling run-before-pass what-you-see-is-what-you-get. In the midfield, Toomua/Kurindrani aren't particularly tricky. On the wing, not much speed to handle Habana and Hendricks. At halfback, Nic White is solid, but not creative. Foley: we don't know how much magic he has to offer against the really big boys. Not a huge surprise that SA scored 7 tries to OZ's one last year; but it would surprise one if Myth 1 was accepted. Myth 2: SA has nothing new to offer. a. SA has improved greatly at the breakdown; as a team. b. SA is scoring tries at the highest rate of any top tier country. c. Several new first phase moves. Watch the first try against Wales in Durban. Variation of maul.

Maybe. But wouldn't we need to see White-Foley handle a Bok-created cauldron first? For all his faults, Morne has been there done that. And last year, Pienaar was masterful at Suncorp. 150 caps + for SA halfbacks vs a dozen for OZ? Test rugby is not the same Then again, we might see Pollard if Morne has a sore back.

Mate you should start watching rugby. Hooper gets around the park a lot, but too small to dominate tackles, was yellow carded twice against SA last year for lift tackles, and was pretty much smashed into oblivion at rucks. Palu is strong, but Duane is along with Read as the best in the game. Alberts, when he is hot he is lava. And when hes average, hes still better than fardy.

I totally get why you Xenomorph, and most Australians don’t rate the Boks. You watch Super 15 and you don’t see any South African players really performing. Those stats are based on Super 15 form are they not? But those stats don’t show the whole picture, because the majority of the Bok team now plays overseas. To get a clearer picture of stats, it’s better to compare when the Wallabies and Boks have played each other. Those stats will tell you, that the Boks were better at the breakdown, the last three times, these teams played each other. Then again a lot is made of the confidence that the Waratahs players have after winning the Super 15, but not a lot is made of the confidence the Bok players, Bakkies Botha, Brian Habana or Juan Smith have after winning the Heineken Cup. In fact probably the best thing the Boks have, over the other teams, is the surprise factor of the majority of their players not playing in the Super 15. As a unit, I think the Bok pack is probably ahead the Wallabies. But I have to agree with you, Xenomorph, on some points. Certain individual players are at least on par. Jannie Du Plessis is no world beater. I don’t think he is going be around for much longer and I think the young Frans Malherbe is going to replace him. Also agree with Biltong, William Alberts is slow and is not an 80 minute player. He runs out of steam in the last 20minutes, but I honestly don’t think Fardy is much better. (maybe on par) Besides Alberts will get replaced with one of, Schalk Burger, Juan Smith or Marcel Coetzee. All who cause major problems for any opposition. Juan Smith was good for Toulon in the Heineken Cup final. If he plays for the Boks coming off the bench, he could well be the Boks secret weapon.

Harry I rate the Wallaby halfback pairing even though inexperienced, as on par and if not better the Boks. But that is because I think Meyer will select Morne Steyn.

Haven't you hear Biltong, Fardy, Palu and Hooper are a better lose trio?

Harry what Xeno (above) does not account for and what I think my real point is is that individual player rating does nothing for a test squad. As a pack SA has it over Aus, as a combined back line I think Aus is more creative and stand a better chance of scoring tries. That said how effective is a back line if the forwards are getting steam rolled? Its a bit silly saying the Wallaby lose trio is better then the boks. The lack of aggression and size is where they lose the race. Its where they lost it last year, they way they got monstered has nothing to do with coaching. If they target Hooper on defence the wallaby pack will struggle, Fardy is a work horse and Palu is great but never really performs that well against the boks. Just my opinion.

Outside backs are even; or maybe SA has the edge (Habana, le Roux). Toomua is not better than Jean de Villiers. Not sure who I'd pick between Pienaar, Phipps, and White. Foley has a lot to prove at RC level, before we assume he's better than Steyn.

1-8 the boks have it over the Wallabies, 10-15 the wallabies have it over the boks. 6, 7, 8 for the boks as individuals and as a hunting party is far superior to the 6, 7, 8 from the Wallabies.

From the majority of people, yes, those ARE the responses. As I said in my post, it's the Insecure A@#$&*^#@'s who exist in every country, even Australia, who use those losses as an EXCUSE to vent their frustration with life in general by beating on their families. Don't think it doesn't happen, we all d*mn well it does.

Mike, I think that is exactly the way it works. Stats get made up all the time to promote, motivate add interest, create debate etc Not saying that it is the way it should be, jsut the way it is.

You should probably read the whole post.

Yeah agree with 99 digger, the 20 minute surge by the French was due to a fanatic French effort in scoring some long range tries. A couple of bounces of the ball also went their way but they applied the pressure and got there while we sat back and watched. 2007 to me felt a bit like the Oz shutout in the 03 semi. We just couldnt do anything on attack where Oz and France both got crucial long range tries.

Is that 'objective' spelt with a capital 'O'?