|Volume 1 - Week 39|
Brilliant! A once proud nation is in mourning and the discontent following the latest Springbok defeat is reverberating across the world. For years, hundreds of thousands of supporters were nourished with the richest chocolate cake imaginable and now to paraphrase Marie Antoinette they are finally forced to eat bread.
The second loss on the ill-fated tour of Europe has ignited a furor amongst all supporters, much more than the usual upset in the wake of a Springbok defeat. Emotions are running high, from one extreme – during and after the match like an Italian taxi driver in St Peter’s Square to a more sedate objective (sort of cool bru) opinion a few days later on. Writing a column for a Thursday publication therefore holds a few advantages; the benefit of hindsight, the opportunity to assess other opinions, to try and control emotions and enough time to form an own point of view.
The most popular cries at the moment are; sack the coach, sack his entourage of foreigners, sack SARFU, sack the players and start afresh for the world cup in 2003. All novel ideas however let’s take a look at all the pleas and let me acknowledge first and foremost that the Springboks under Harry Viljoen’s tenure has been shocking. Statistics, which can be easily manipulated, are null and void in this case because it makes for even more dire reading. Since SA rugby is now run as a professional (?) business one must begin somewhere and as usual a good beginning is at the top.
In control of SA rugby is a dinosaur called SARFU and no matter how many name changes or re-organisations has taken place the game is run by a nameless and faceless group far more interested in political agendas than the general good of the game. For years and this is no revolutionary theory the “agendas” appointed and fired coaches at every whim yet they remain firmly entrenched in power with an embarrassing back slapping mentality worthy of a good puke. Yes, the union are nauseatingly wealthy, vision 2003 will produce x amount of AA players and with these financial and political gains who dares to argue the success of SARFU. The one small matter of a team worthy of such a “successful” union has conveniently slipped their minds and is lost in a sea of political hobnobbing.
The coach, a SARFU appointee is like any other employee in the service of any other company but with its own special brand of pressures. Agreed, if the person cannot do the job, get rid of him but how can any board of directors justify the selection and subsequent relieve of 7 coaches in 9 years? The coach happens to be a vital ingredient of the team and historically, continuity of the right coach produced rich dividends, Dawie Snyman, Buurman van Zyl, Ian Mac, Kitch Christie and Nick Mallett. Whose fault is it then that the coach is not performing? Surely the group that appointed him! Responsibility for actions or non-actions is a disease within SARFU, like AIDS it seems incurable and just like the government the famous ostrich mentality resides amongst them. The nation is quite correct – sack ‘em!
I thought long and hard about Harry Viljoen short and sweet, the man is playing catch-up in terms of coaching experience he missed during the vital period of 1997 to 2000 period when there was untold changes in the professional game. Nothing wrong with that but not with a national team and especially not the Springboks. The man’s business sense and his move towards bringing professionalism into South African rugby and the players are commendable and much needed but like the barman boasting about being a psychologist, law adviser, marriage councilor etc while the only thing the customer want is a beer, his focus is on everything but coaching rugby. It will not benefit SA rugby to get rid of Harry, he must regain his focus, motivation, vision and original instinct, as a successful man in own right he will now realise that it is back to basics and keep the eye on the ball. The nation should give him a chance; his excellent results at provincial level only bore fruit after a few tepid performances and who else to do the job?
Harry’s Harriers, the difficult to believe 19 man entourage (!), has let the manager (Harry) and the team down, obviously they were appointed to analyse and coach the team to all kinds of world beating methods and skills. Based on performance on the park, sorry boys you are not making the grade – a good coach brings the best out of any player that is his job first and foremost. The nation is quite correct – sack ‘em! Ps: Well done with the defence Les but then we’ve always been good at that.
The players, now here one can match the volume of encyclopedia Britannica but there is very little point in discussing the players when everything above them are inherently flawed. Yes there are certain players who’ve outstayed their welcome but then no player has ever chosen himself. Commitment is not a problem, any player willing to defend for 80 odd minutes without letting in a try has commitment. The one valid charge may be the lack of implementation, somehow the copious amounts of theory stayed on the training ground and never came to fruition on the park. Sack ‘em? No, I don’t think so, there are a lot of good players, what they need is somebody to extract the brilliance.
Is SA rugby in a crisis? Is John Robbie’s proclamation on Boots and All, “nobody’s died, it’s a game” a valid comment? The poor supporters are definitely baying for the declaration of a “national disaster” however after an excellent Super 12 and great top eight Currie Cup phase there is plenty of good to work with. The old motto of South Africa spring to mind as a springboard to a solution, ex unitate vires or strength in unity.
Twickenham, the beautiful home of English rugby, was bathed in splendid sunshine for the 21st meeting between the hosts and South Africa. A capacity crowd welcomed both teams with rapturous applause and a stirring performance of “God save the Queen” left few in doubt of their allegiance and their heroes did not disappoint.
The match kicked off with an error from Jonny Wilkinson but as the match panned out this was his first and final mistake. The young match winner again proved his massive worth with a 21-point contribution in the annihilation of the Springboks. England was full value for money, expertly led by Martin Johnson they finally came of age in a match they controlled from start to finish.
The Springbok’s once again were poor, too many errors contributed to their downfall and the expected tactic of kicking the ball into enemy territory and then apply pressure was easily dealt with by a magnificent performance from the diminutive ex Wigan player, Jason Robinson. Like a matador his deft footwork left the on storming defenders grasping at air and once held his upper body strength ensured that no ball was turned over. But then the Springboks hardly attempted the art of turnovers, they were far too busy spoiling and slowing the ball down at breakdowns, inevitably conceding numerous penalties.
The England performance confirmed their standing as the best team in the world; cool and calculated they methodically exposed the Springboks weaknesses and exploited them unmercifully. The backline although penetrative lacked real firepower and here they might fall short in the next year and a bit’s buildup to the World Cup but the forwards are strong, aggressive and highly skilled with enough younger players graduating through the ranks. Clive Woodward can revel in a process that began after the drop kick defeat in the previous World Cup and now stand at full fruition with the decimation of the very same opponents; his challenge is to maintain the momentum.
The Springboks, fifth and sliding? The performance against England left few in doubt that there are serious problems to deal with in order to climb the ladder back to the top of rugby supremacy. One can easily criticize but in all honesty the basic errors did not improve, there were too many knock ons, fifty fifty passes mostly from the skipper (who should be setting an example) and still no plan in the backline. The problems are reoccurring and there has been no progress whatsoever since the very first defeat against France in June this year.
The biggest problem is not the past performances but what and where now? Sack the coach, sack the captain? Will these measures rectify what has become an ostensibly lost cause? South African rugby is inherently strong and of an even stronger mindset, change has been advocated for the past three to four years however nobody has been able to clearly define the change or “process”, from what to what? The Australians conned everyone the last few years into believing that rugby needs to change. Yes, they are successful but with exponents specific to their gameplan it does look attractive doesn’t?
England, France and the All Blacks under Mitchell has realised that rugby in essence is a simple game of which the most important factor is to play according to your strengths. South Africa does not have the players for an elaborate Australian game plan, period. The sooner the administrators, selectors and coaches realise where the strengths lay in both personnel, tactics and execution then the results and success will improve drastically. The very same group of people should also shoulder responsibility for failure.
The Springboks missed another crucial opportunity with this failed European tour to introduce new personnel and test them at the level they are expected to perform. The time is running out and so it seems has the answers, excuses and the options.
Join the SARUGBY news and discussion group for the fastest sarugby news and the most intense debates around the South African game. Go to: www.bigfoot.com/~sarugby or send a blank email to email@example.com
Harry Viljoen makes statements about " The PATH ", look Harry, if we wanted a Star Wars Jedi master we would have gone to George Lucas. Markus Basson
"Leave that for the forwards!" Zinzan Brooke after Stefan Terblanche's botched drop goal attempt for the Babaas vs Australia.
They (SA rugby administrators) duck below the parapets heroically avoiding the flak and then Clinton-like emerge anxiously grinning away, shaking each others hands, hoping the public have forgotten the mess they have helped to create. Nick Mallett
Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all time thing. You don't win once in a while, you don't do things right once in a while, you do them right all the time. Winning is habit. Unfortunately, so is losing. Vince Lombardi
Visit: - www.southafricansupportersclub.com for South African News, Merchandise and Products.
As most SA Rugby supporters, I find it very difficult to remain positive in terms of our current Bok set-up, including the choices having been exercised by Harry Viljoen, as well as Bob Skinstad....on and off the field.
Firstly, during 1995/96 season when Franscois Pienaar was dropped from the Springbok squad, under controversial circumstances, the Boks experienced the worst run of rugby since our return to the international rugby arena. Gary Teichmann was omitted from the pre-RFC team on similarly controversial ways, by Nick Mallet, and again 1999 & 2000 seasons were a disaster.
Enter Harry Viljoen: He drops Vossie, for reasons understandable only from a certain point of view. However, uncertainty reigns again in the Springbok camp. Again the cycle is repeated, and again we are all surprised that the Boks are having such a bad run.
Inconsistency is capital at the moment. The great Bob himself stands up in the media and says the Boks didn't play according to their game plan, against the French. "Bob reads a game like no other." "There is no player like Bob." Bob is now the Springbok captain, yet he cannot get his team to play according to how they trained. "Hullo!!" The captain is not doing his job!
So now we have two things.....no, three.
1.A Bok captain was dropped suddenly from the team with the arrival of yet another coach, and SA Rugby is yet again in a mess.
2.We have a new captain, slightly overrated, but backed solidly by his coach, also guilty of consistent inconsistency.
3.They are all big enough to stand before the media and honestly admit that the Springbok team played in a way Harry Viljoen definitely did not show them how.
And the game plan was not executed, because the team played a game entirely on their own.
Fact, Harry is grabbing straws.
Fact, Bob Skinstad was a brilliant loose forward three years ago.
Fact, rugby has moved on in the mean time.
I am afraid Bob and Harry are neither living up to their responsibilities. Unfortunately, as most SA Rugby supporters, I am only commenting on the negative points, and I have even fewer solutions to this negativity. However, these points are valid.
My only suggestion, to contradict this entire letter to you, Lucas, is get rid of Skinstad. He has been the #1 point of controvercy over the last 3 years of our National game. Take him out, and you open up huge opportunities.
I don't believe Rassie was not good enough to be fielded as a Bok loose forward. I believe there was anamosity between him and Skinstad, and therefore Rassie was side lined. This is not the first time this has happened with Bob in the midst of a Bok controvercy. There has been numerous rumours of dissatisfaction with the treatment of Bob Skinstad. Substatiated or not, this is a team sport. You don't upset the balance of a team, for the sake of a 'potential briliant' player.
We lost an unbelievably consistent, steadfast, successful captain in Gary Teichmann, due to controvercy surrounding Bob Skinstad. And we lost a world cup that should have been ours for the taking.
I don't believe Biob is as good as everybody says. Where is his consistency? He knocks balls regularily, has a flashy move now and then, but on the whole, is he actually as good as they say? On the whole, how good is Rassie then? In terms of consistency, how good is Rassie then?
Why was Pieter Roussouw recalled? Why did they play Braam, when they knew he was leaving? Why did Harry not used this opportunity to field a new #10. Where the hell is young Swart today? At the Stormers, perhaps, but why was he included in a Plettenbergbay training camp, when Harry could have called up young vd Westhuizen or even Chris Roussow?
Why are we fielding players the likes of Roussow, Montgomery, and even Jantjes? What exactly has Jantjes done recently that justifies him being in the squad? Where are the new generation players of SA rugby?
Wylie Human. A wing with attidue
Adrian Jacobs. Just plain good
Deon Kayser. I know he is old, but how long did Chester Williams play brilliant rugby for SA? He can play at wing and centre equally efficient
Thinus Delport. Fullback and wing.
Gaffie du Toit. Flyhalf and full back.
Stefan Terblanche. International debut at full back, specialist wing, but can play centre.
This is about it, Lucas. I said my say. I catch up with you once I am ready to give a piece of my mind on the England Rugby team.
Till next time then
I too have watched the Springboks under Harry Viljoen with a growing sense of dismay at the way things have turned out. Harry's approach towards some of the media and his detractors smacks of arrogance. It is sad to see a coach who's attitude is "I don't give a damn, leave me alone". Of course, the Springboks' record under his tutelage is not a proud one, and fair enough, he has had injury problems. But how does he ignore the talents of some players (eg Trevor Halstead for such a long time) while retaining ageing players who are past their sell by date (Joost, Slap chips, Percy), or clearly not a part of his "Vision 2003" (eg Braam, Vos).
Are these the actions of an astute coach? Some people are good, some are bad, and it looks like Harry just doesn't have it.
However, the cherry on the cake came when I was reading the IOL this morning and came across one of these "Mallets" (Remember the breaking story of Nick Mallet predicting his team would lose against the All Blacks a couple of years ago?).
"We have had to adapt to what we have got. If we had wonderful athletes, we would have played differently on this tour. But we do not, so we are playing according to the talent available. "
So much for having confidence in your players.
Well, by the time you publish this letter, we will know whether the Boks were good enough to beat England or not. Nevertheless, I don't know that Harry will last. The knives are out, and he has certainly not helped his cause.
Last item, I was rather sickened to see our petulent captain ask the ref to call on the TV ref to make sure an Italian try was good. After being about 30 points ahead, he still wanted to have a try over-ruled when it was scored in the middle of the in-goal area, not even dicey.
Cheers, love the weekly mail!
What has happened to international rugby these days? Coaches, management & fans all seem to want one-off internationals, fly-in fly-out, players collect the bruises and the management collects the pay cheques. Where has the 10-match 4-test tour gone? In a very short time, the RWC & Tri-Nations have effectively killed off the brilliance that was International Rugby Football. National sides seemingly want to notch up enough statistics which proclaim themselves 'favourites' for the next World Cup, play it, and then start again. Is that all that matters these days? It appears that the rugby tours of our parents' generation are no more, and we are killing the goose that laid the golden egg.
One of the things that made The 2001 Lions all the more mouthwatering was the fact that they are now the last recognised proper rugby tour in existence. The Aussie public were clammering for more of the same when the tour party left. When the 1997 Lions left SA, Louis Luyt called for them to tour more often, as it would break up the monotony of facing the same sides annually. The original schedule of 4 tests was curtailed very early on in the planning stage so there could be deemed a clear winner. It appears that tradition & history is important, but not as much as a country's name on a trophy. Surely bringing back 6 to 8 week tour would solve the quandry.
The last tour by a rugby superpower was in 1996, New Zealand in South Africa, before the Tri-Nations started. That was 5 years ago. Now all we seem to have is one international after another. Surely only a cyclops with an eye-patch is oblivious to the fact that it is sytematically threatening the culture of international rugby that has been nurtured over many decades.
Young players would go abroad and have to prove themselves mentally and physically capable of standing up to be counted for their country. Older players would act like father-figures, responsible for the next generation of Springbok or All Black. The trust built up was and is irreplaceable. Those uncapped would appreciate that the boots they were being asked to fill are not just of the immediate predecessor, but of all of the players who have pulled on the jersey of their country before them. This feeling cannot be replicated by a 'motivation consultant' gving a lecture to the players in a conference hall before the plane departs. Players like Lawrence Dallagio were blooded, (quite literally in his case), in the English tour to SA in 1994. He came through with honour, whilst Tim Rodber showed that under immense pressure he would crack. That type of intense scrutiny is now deficient, and the rugby playing fraternity is poorer for it. As the one-off match Australia played against Oxford University showed, the pleasure derived by the local public watching ' their boys' playing a touring team is far more ingratiating than watching the national superstars.
Tours had a kinship of their own. Even if not picked for the test side, the mid-week team would fight for each other. A South African friend of mine once told me how the touring midweek SA side used to kill a springbok while hunting, and have it's head mounted before going abroad. They would present that to the first team that beat them while on tour. Where has all that gone? Coaches could try out new ideas without the threat of being judged on their results. Players would play for the jersey, their peers and the senoir players, not just a coach. Flamboyance could be seen everywhere on the paddock. When was the last time we sat down and watched a match and witnessed an individual piece of brilliance, (as was commonplace in the 70's & 80's)?. I am not saying that this is now extinct, (as the talents of Brian O'Driscoll would show), but I am saying that the the lack of tours is making his type of dexterity all the rarer.
We have become used to the Wallaby winning machine. They may undeniably beat all-comers, but their style is not one to entertain impartials. It makes me think that if they did have a Mark Ella or David Campese of their present generation, they would not make the squad as unique skills do not conform to their gameplan. Even the mercurial skills of Stephen Larkham have been cooled, he was a far better open-field runner when he came onto the scene in 1997 than he is now. They do not beat their man one-on-one anymore, but create overlaps through phase play. If you name any great try, you will find it being devoid of set pieces and phases. The ball goes through hands from one player to the next, contact is taken but the pill has already been passed. Remember the first try by the Barbarians against New Zealand in 1974, or the French try in RWC 87 commomnly dubbed 'the try from the end of the earth'. This type of skill took years to accomplish, and could never be incorporated into a gameplan.
The innate trust amongst players, and the enjoyment of the public is being eroded because of it. It is not becase there are not good enough players, but because they do not play with each other in the testing conditions of tours often enough to form that bond. Their rare skills are not exposed enough to be able to gain that trust, and the coach only looks ahead as far as his term in office. They are being taught to stick to the tried and tested formulas of their coaching team that will win one-off tests and tournaments, and not cultivate the flair that only God has give them.
As long as the Tri-Nations continues, I do not think we will see one of the SH sides making a proper tour again. There is no point of playing the same team more than twice per year is there? The current style of short & sharp visits will become the norm, and the essential element that has defined rugby football since it began, the camaraderie amongst teams, and that between touring sides and opponents, will be gone.
Wat 'n teleurstelling, op die trant wat ons nou aangaan is dit net 'n kwessie van tyd voordat ons nie eers meer teen Italie kan kompiteer nie. Daar kan verskeie redes wees en laat my toe om my opinies te lig aangesien ek al hoe skamer word dat Springbok rugby met SA geassosieer word.
1) Vanaf die huidige regering oorgeneem het en hulle inmenging met alle sake, op werkgebied sowel as sport, beweeg ons al hoe meer agteruit. Magtig waaroor gaan dit, kan hulle nie sien dat daar geen talente onder hulle is nie en dat ons trotse nasie se eer besig is om te verbrokkel. So loop ook al die stadion's leeg met die kwota stelsel, want die rugby se standaarde met alle respek gesê is baie power. (Skole Cravenweek sowel as op senior vlak - Behalwe top skole waar die seuns hulle plekke op verdienste verdien!!)
2) Harry het weer nuwe planne, volgens koerant wat hy wil voorlê aan SARVU. Ek hoop wragtig nie hy gaan nog deel wees van Springbok rugby se toekoms planne nie. Mike Haysman het die week met krieket kommentaar gesê jy kies die vorm speler en nie 'n speler vir die toekoms nie aangesien hy dalk nie die paal mag haal nie! Nog 'n tip vir ou Harry!!
3) Hou proewe met keurders wat die span kies en gee dan die span hopelik aan 'n nuwe afrigter.
Bietjie oor die debakel van Saterdag. Ek sien daar is nog 'n Sondag koerantskrywer wat sê Joost kry nie die bal weg nie. Menere julle weet blykbaar niks van rugby nie, hoe kan hy die bal wegkry as almal in die agterlyn staan. Die voorspelers oa Victor, AJ, Mark, Vos, en ons hopelose kaptein moet eers hulle werk voor doen, dan sal Joost weer sy briljantheid ten toon stel. Breyton is huidiglik seker die bangste rugby speler in die land, maar sy plek is mos veilig, Conrad is seker die swakste regstellende aksie want ek wonder hoeveel keer hy die afgelope tyd in posisie was en moenie eers praat van sy swak opsies nie. Dit was nogal 'n verrassing toe ou Bob nie die rugbyspeler van die toets was nie. Aangeë met een hand? Wanneer leer ou Harry sy manne as die aangee nie aan is nie, plaas jy die bal en almal gaan oor die bal, maar o weë, almal staan mos in die agterlyn.
Sewe rugby. Ek het in my lewe nog nie so 'n klomp bangbroeke bymekaar gesien nie! Kies Breyton vir die sewes, waar hy tot sy reg sal kom want hy is te lig vir vyftienman rugby.
Ek moet darem ook sê dat daar net 2 anderkleurige spelers is wat deurkom, nl. Wylie Human en Jacobs van die Valke.
Groete en mag Gert Smal en Carl du Plessis ons nuwe afrigters wees met ou Harry en sy Australianse trawante uit!!
Eerstens wil ek elke Springbok wat op die veld teen Engeland was, gelukwens dat hulle hul beste gegee het in moeilike omstandighede. Hulle het soos Trojane verdedig teen een van die beste spanne op die planeet en hul bes gedoen om met 'n onwerkbare, uitgediende wedstrydplan vol te hou. Teen die einde, toe hulle weens die agterstand van die wedstrydplan afgewyk het, het hulle ook 'n paar mooi aanvalle geloods. Daarom wil ek dit benadruk dat wat ek ook al hierna sê, nie as kritiek op enige speler gemik is nie; hulle het per slot van sake nie hulself gekies nie en ook nie die wedstrydplan ontwerp nie.
Dit bring my by die einste wedstrydplan. Ek het reeds in Mei of Junie, voor die Bokke se eerste toets van die jaar en nadat dit bekend geword het dat Harry Viljoen 'n klomp Australiese raadgewers aangestel het, my kommer uitgespreek in 'n brief aan Sport-Rapport. Ek het daarin gemeld dat as Viljoen wil kyk na die toekoms van internasionale rugby, hy by Engeland moet gaan kers opsteek en nie by Australië nie. [Die Anglofobiese redaksie van Sport-Rapport het die brief natuurlik nie geplaas nie.]
Vir my is dit reeds die afgelope paar jaar duidelik dat Engeland daarin geslaag het om Totale Rugby - waar voor- en agterspelers by mekaar aansluiting vind op die aanval, sonder dat enigeen die basiese aspekte van voor- en agterspel agterweë laat, én waarin individuele vernuf tot uiting kan kom - onder die knie gekry het. Hierteenoor speel Australië 'n vervelige tipe rugby wat die afgelope paar jaar vir hulle (en die Brumbies) gewerk het, maar noudat ander spanne dit ontleed het, nie sukses in die toekoms sal behaal nie.
As ek 'n boek oor Australiese rugby sou skryf, sou ek dit die titel gee: "Rugby for Dummies". Na my mening het Australië sowat 5 jaar gelede besef dat hulle nie die spelers met die individuele briljantheid het van byvoorbeeld Suid-Afrika en Nieu-Seeland nie. Daarom sou hulle moes staatmaak op 'n spelpatroon wat vir hierdie gebrek sou kompenseer. Hierin het hulle skitterend geslaag. Deur dieselfde 5 of 6 bewegings oor en oor te herhaal (tot vervelens toe, maar ook tot perfeksie toe), het hulle reggekry om opponente se verdediging uiteindelik genoegsaam af te takel dat hulle drieë kon aanteken sonder enige flair of individuele stukkies spel. Die bekendste hiervan is natuurlik Gregan na Larkham wat skuins hardloop, twee spelers oorslaan met sy aangee na 'n sterk senter of flank wat dan die volgende fase afdwing, en Gregan se binne-aangee na Finegan (naby die doellyn om te druk, of om weereens die volgende fase af te dwing). Dit verklaar waarom Australiese kommentators so opgewonde raak wanneer daar verby die sewende fase beweeg word: hulle weet hul wedstrydplan word tot op die letter uitgevoer.
Dit bring my terug by die Bokke. Deurdat ons huidige afrigter hierdie uitgediende spelpatroon op die nasionale span probeer afdwing, het hy met een klap reggekry om ons spelers se individuele briljantheid te onderdruk, 'n spelpatroon te probeer vestig wat nie by ons spelers pas nie en, natuurlik, fisies groot spelers ten koste van vernuftige spelers te kies.
Reeds met Viljoen se eerste toets as afrigter verlede jaar (teen Argentinië) het mens die idee gekry dat hy takties naïef is, toe hy die Springbokspan verbied het om enigsins takties of onder druk te skop in 80 minute van toetsrugby! Dit het gedui op 'n algehele gebrek aan 'n wedstrydplan en die onderdrukking van spelers se instinkte. Hierdie benadering het nou "full circle" gekom deurdat hy die Springbokke klaarblyklik opdrag gegee het om elke bal te skop, en dit vermom as 'n "wedstrydplan". Sy taktiese naïwiteit is natuurlik sedertdien op vele wyses bevestig, die mees onlangse voorbeelde sy keuse van sterk, maar onvernuftige agterspelers en die feit dat hy van die beste spanne ter wêreld aandurf sonder 'n ware "fetcher" onder die losvoorspelers.
Dit laat die vraag ontstaan: Hoe is 'n afrigter aangestel wat self destyds erken het dat hy vir 'n paar jaar kontak met rugby verloor het? Sou hierdie gebrek aan kontak nie noodwendig meebring dat hy in die donker sou rondtas en sou eksperimenteer met Springbokrugby nie? Het SARFU ten spyte van dié wete hom aangestel? Of was SARFU die enigstes op aarde wat dit nie geweet het nie?
Konklusie: Ironies genoeg sal die Springbok-spelers nou uitgekryt word vir hul spel teen Frankryk en Engeland. Die afrigter sal gekruisig word omdat hy met soveel uitstaande spelers tot sy beskikking niks kan uitrig nie. Maar, soos voorafgaande redenasies tog duidelik maak, is dit SARFU wat al die blaam moet kry. Sal iemand in SARFU opstaan en verantwoordelikheid neem? Ons wag...
COLIN VAN RENSBURG
Goeie Môre Ed
Wel weereens watter teleurstellende naweek vir Suid Afrikaanse Rugby liefhebbers.Almal wonder seker wat die verskonings die week sal wees,Wel dit sal ons van Mnr.Viljoen moet hoor.Daar was gesê dat die manne nie doen wat hulle geleer word om te doen nie.
Arme Joost,almal verwag dat hy alles moet doen.Vanwaar kom hierdie nuwe manierv an
lynstane.Hulle het dit nou al in soveel "GAMES" probeer maar tog ploeter hulle maar voort.
Wat het geword van basiese rugby.Hulle kan wel iets op die oefen veld leer,maar dit is nie te sê dat dit so in 'n "game" gaan werk nie.
Dit sal beter gaan as die lostrio by die afbreek punte kom.Dit is mos wat hulle werk is,ons het mos senters in die binne veld,wat soek hulle daar.Bob Skinstad het 'n "8" op sy rug nie 'n "12 of 13" en die res nie.Elke speler op die veld het sy eie werk om te doen.As dit eendag gebeur,wel dan behoort on weer SPRINGBOK RUGBY te sien.
Wel groetnis hier van 'n baie warm KWA - ZULU - NATAL.
Bekommerde Bok ondersteuner
Hi there Ed,
The latest Zurich World Rugby Rankings have just come out for all to see. I've included the list below. Due to recent losses by Australia & South Africa and with NZ and England stringing some wins together we now have a Northern Hemisphere rugby nation knocking on the door of No 1 status. If the All Blacks lose in Argentina apparently England will go top !! As a Kiwi who is obviously glad to see NZ at the top I'm also concerned with England's rise to No 2. Their failure to score trys and play the game in a positive manner is disappointing (they would rather take 3 points for a drop goal than converting field position and pressure into a 7 pointer). If this was rectified then maybe they would be more deserving of the No 2 (or even No 1 position). Combined with the fact that they've had the Six nations tournament as buildup before these games whilst the Southern hemisphere teams are starting their seasons their performances don't reflect the world class tags they're purporting to be.
For everyone's sake, keep peaking in between the World Cups England and South Africa and Australia, please pick your games up a bit so the tri-nations can once again retain the 1-2-3 placings in the rankings.
Roll on the World Cup.
Die manier waarop die Bokke deesdae speel is heeltemal onaanvaarbaar. Maar hulle sê mos jy speel soos jy oefen en dit bewys net dat Harry nie die regte man vir die saak is nie hoe kan mense kies wat nog kinders is en verwag hulle moet goed doen hier is my droom bok groep:
Heelagters: T.Delport, F.Lombaard
Vleuels : S.Terblannche , D.Hall, F.Welsh ,W.Human
Senters: A.Snyman, T.Halstead, G.Bobo, D.Barry ,R.Fleck
Loskakels : G.du Toit , J.vd Westhuyzen
Skrumskakels : J.vd Westhuizen ,C.Davidson
Losvoorspelers : R.Erasmus ,A.Vos (C) ,C.Krige ,A.J. Venter
Slotte : V.Matfield ,M.Andrews ,H.Louw ,J.Ackerman ,A.Venter
Stutte : W.Meyer ,O. le Roux ,L.Sephaka ,D.Carstens
Hakers : L.von Biljon ,J.Smit
En my Span is
1.O. le Roux
Ek hoop ,maar net Harry word gou wakker voor ons nog teen iemand soos die V.S.A verloor
Groete met hoop
|© Copyright 2002 Rugby Forum. All rights reserved.|