fromthecouch

I will remember this Saturday morning for a long time, sadly for all the reasons I wouldn’t want to. To beat the All Blacks in New Zealand is a rare feat for any team, but the Springboks will rue this game that got away in particular. The All Blacks were not their invincible selves today, granted King Carter had vacated his throne for the day, Sonny-Bill was likely sampling some sushi and the mongrel Mealamu was taking some time out on the bench, but the Springboks failed to take advantage of this opportunity. Awry lineouts, erratic scrumming and woeful kicking aside the Boks still had the All Blacks under pressure for large parts of the game. They smashed them at the advantage line, hit rucks with far more conviction and generally laid a platform for their backs to bury the Blacks. Alas it never happened. In between butchering a couple of great scoring opportunities out wide, missing some easy penalty kicks and generally providing the All Blacks with a constant supply of ball from errant kicks the Boks simply failed to convert their advantage.

The scrums were a great contest and though neither team gained outright ascendency, the Boks edged the contest with some powerful shoves. There were some unnecesarry problems with the engagement that need to be addressed though and with a little attention the Bok pack is definitely good enough. The less said about the lineouts probably the better, poor throwing and what seemed like communication problems saw the Boks lose a number of lineouts. It may be fair to state that the tight 5 was a new unit, but at the top level there is no room for basic errors. Despite this the Bok pack stumbling at times in set pieces, they were much more direct in open play. Some good work at the breakdown made life difficult for the All Blacks who simply could not generate momentum for most of the match. The loose-forwards really put their hands up and with Alberts looking less like a lone crusader the Boks took the fight to McCaw and Co. Francois Louw certainly made his presence felt and Duane Vermeulen got stuck in. Meyer must be a worried man though when he surveys his tight five options, Dean Greyling is out of his depth and will no doubt get a suspension for his outright stupidity. The Beast worked tirelessly as ever and though Strauss struggled with his set-pieces, he was good in the loose. Jannie du Plessis was once again steady and that he carries so much responsibilty highlights the Boks lack of options at tighthead. The return of Coenie Oosthuisen to action with the Cheetahs will be eagerly watched.

Flip vd Merwe was industrious and did well to make his presence felt, he is often guilty of unnecesary penalties, but that is the role he plays. Juandre Kruger must shoulder much of the blame for the poor lineout performance of the Boks. Meyer needs to establish who his general is and stick with it. Perhaps a little harsh as this combination is new, but again it is surely a case of step up or step aside. The major flaws for the Bok pack today stemmed from teamwork and leadership and this will improve. Strauss needs to call the scrums better and between him and Kruger (if he remains the man in possesion) they need to iron out the lieout kinks. On the whole though it was an impressive performance by the Bok pack and they can certainly take heart that they are indeed competitive at this level. The eventual return of Coenie Oosthuisen, Bismarck du Plessis, Eben Etsebeth and Schalk Burger would certainly strengthen the Bok cause and the platform is certainly there to dictate our game to other teams. I for one believe there is the makings of an excellent Bok pack to take us forward and young guns like Steven Kitschoff, Ruan Botha, Frans Malherbe and Pieter-Steph du Toit will no doubt grow in stature as they mature. As ever our loose-forward stocks are looking good and Marcell Coetsee, Siya Kolisi and others will keep the heat on the incumbents.

That is where the good news ends though. The woes of the back division have reached a serious low-point. Francois Hougaard has looked far more comfortable and accomplished as a wing, while Ruan Pienaar has lacked the threat offered by his predecessor Fourie du Preez. As combinations go you simply have to have a 9/10 axis that can dictate a game. Morne Steyn is in a slump and with little help from his scrumhalf has been unable to have any control on the game. Poor kicking and decision making have blighted the Bok half-back combination regardless of wether Pienaar or Hougaard have been selected. Steyn was guilty this morning of some abysmal kicking out of hand and his goalkicking has suffered together with his plummeting confidence. The half-backs can certainly take a large portion of the blame for the Boks failure to turn good forward play in to points.

Frans Steyn looks to be finding some form, but having to play from deep and getting poor ball it is testament to his ability that he manages to make anything happen. It must be unbelievably frustrating for him to have little opportunity to play with ball in hand. Most of his work revolves around trying to get to the advantage line or clean up scrappy ball. He immediately showed his menace when Goosen gave him good flat ball to work with. It is like having Sonny-Bill and asking him to stop off-loading in to space. Steyn has not been helped by Jean de Villiers looking all at sea outside him. Meyer needs to have a long hard think about wether a veteran player should be asked to re-invent himself in the twilight of his career. De Villiers has shown glimpses, but today he ran poor lines, made poor decision and some shocking passes let him down. The skipper has had far better days on the park and will need to have a look at his game. His leadership and decision making has been tested and sadly he has not delivered.

That there is so much exciting talent available in the country bodes well for the future, but sadly for Meyer he needs to make sure the Boks deliver here and now. Johan Goosen showed in his effort today that we can play positive rugby and threaten with ball in hand. We have an army of ball carriers capable of taking the ball over the advantage line, all we need now is some spark and direction to give our backs the chance to capitalise. We have players with skill, pace and guile and we must bring them in to the game. Heyneke Meyer missed a great opportunity today to put one past the All Blacks early in his tenure and one has to wonder wether such an opportunity will present itself again. The Boks today were undone by poor decisions behind the pack and a gameplan that stifles any creativity at the back. I for one must question the ability of Ricardo Loubser at this level or the persistence with an out of form Steyn playing a gameplan that telegraphs its own intent. Can the Boks turn this around and take some heart from what went right today? I hope so.

The Lions-Kings saga has created some very heated debate at times and the word “merit” seems to be particularly popular. Regardless of the Kings claims to Super Rugby inclusion, I find myself questioning the Lions credentials to be in the competition. Consider the following facts and then weigh their case for inclusion:

When the Super 10 was launched in 1993 Transvaal were a dominant force in Currie Cup rugby, having finished as runners-up in 1991 and 1992, they won the cup in 1993 and 1994. In 1993 they won the first Super 10 final against Auckland at home, while 1994 saw them finish 4th in their pool (ironically one position above winless Eastern Province). They bounced back in 1995 in the final edition of the Super 10 only to be defeated by Queensland in the final at Ellis Park.

With the launch of the Super 12 competition in 1996 came the professional era. While both New Zealand and Australia immediately adopted a franchise system, South Africa kept qualification based on Currie Cup performance. The Transvaal team finished 10th in the competition despite having finished as runners-up to the Sharks in the Currie Cup. In 1997 Transvaal qualified again and adopted the name Gauteng Lions for the Super 12 season. They finished 5th behind the Sharks and missed the semi-finals by a mere 2 points.

The 1998 season saw a major change as South Africa decided to adopt the franchise system and this saw the the birth of the ill-fated Cats. The first two seasons saw the Cats struggle to 6 wins from 22 matches and having finished 12th and then 11th, they certainly had not done justice to a very capable squad. The Cats however struck gold in 2000 and 2001 when they made consecutive semi-finals under New Zealand coach Laurie Mains. Despite the ongoing rumblings of an unhappy marriage between the Lions and Cheetahs there was renewed hope.

It was simply not to be and the 2002 season saw the Cats finish 11th with a single win from 11, only the winless Bulls finished worse off. This trend continued in 2003 with the Cats this time propping up the table in 12th position with 2 wins, while 2004 saw a solitary win and last place again. 2005 saw them finish 11th ahead of the Sharks by virtue of bonus points, their solitary win for the season made it 5 wins from 44 games since their semi-final appearances. It was only too clear that the franchise system had reduced the Cats to perenial bottom feeders and relief came in 2006 with the introduction of the Super 14 or did it?

The Super 14 saw the Cheetahs and Force added to the competition and spelt the beginning of the end for the Cats moniker. Though divorced from the Cheetahs, the Lions still played as the Cats and managed to stave off the wooden spoon with 2 wins from 13, one better than the newly formed Force. Ironic that the Lions former franchise partners, the Cheetahs, finished 10th with 5 wins. September 2006 saw the launch of the Lions as we have come to know them. A new logo and some PR couldn’t inspire any improvement as 2007 saw the Lions again last of the South African contingent. They did improve to a 12th placed finished with 5 wins, one win more than te Cheetahs who finished 11th on points difference.

The Lions then followed this improved effort with 2 wins in 2008 firmly rooted to the bottom of the table, though again pipped by the Cheetahs with one fewer win, but this time on bonus points. 2009 saw them creep up to 12th place and with 4 wins the Lions had now won 13 matches from 52. The Lions were struggling, but at least they had managed to finish ahead of the Cheetahs for the first time since they parted ways as the Cats. However, it was in 2010 that the Lions hit their rock bottom. They lost 13 straight to become only the second team to finish a season winless, the Bulls lost 11 in 2002 to set the record. The Lions had been surpassed by their former bedfellows The Cheetahs, the newly formed Force and were without question the poorest Super Rugby team during the Super 12 and Super 14 formats.

2011 again saw a change and the expanded conference format Super 15 was born. The Lions finished 11 points adrift of the Cheetahs in the South African conference and bettered the debutant Melbourne Rebels by 5 points to avoid the wooden spoon. A draw and 3 additional bonus points made up for the gap, but despite the Lions haul of 3 wins being their 3rd best effort since parting with the Cheetahs, the Rebels matched this in their debut season. At home though the Lions won the Currie Cup later in the year, their first trophy since 1999. There was renewed optimism for 2012 and with the controversial Southern Kings waiting in the wings, many hoped the Lions would spurred to greater success.

Alas, the Lions failed to produce, managing only 3 wins for the season, they once again finished in last place. They found themselves 13 points adrift of the Cheetahs in the South African conference, who finished in a respectable 10th position. It is evident that there is no performance merit in favour of the Lions then, they have consistently been the whipping boys of Super Rugby and their exclusion will have little impact on the tournament itself. Wether or not the Southern Kings deserve to be there is a different argument all together, but there is no doubt that for whatever reasons the Johanesburg based franchise has not managed to make a case for inclusion on the field. It begs only a quick look at the Cheetahs and their record since going it alone in 2006, to see that just maybe there is a little hope for the Kings!

The Cheetahs have finished in 10th on 3 occasions, 11th twice, 13th and 14th in their 7 seasons. They have won 27 of 97 matches played (a win ratio of 27.84%), this is by no means an enviable record, but compared to the Lions with 19 from 97 (19.59%) it looks just that little better.

Sporting genius and exceptional talent are not commodities that are easily found, but in every sporting generation there are those that simply stand proud of all others. These individuals are often not only great performers on the field, but also off it. Cricket has in recent years marveled at the skills of Brian Lara, stood in awe of Shane Warne and enjoyed the sheer quality of Sachin Tendukar to name a few.  None have been perfect, but all have delivered with their own personal style. Their collective greatness cannot be argued. Enter one Kevin  Peter Pietersen (aka KP).

The self-proclaimed great has talent in abundance, he certainly knows how to get attention and is without doubt one of the most unlovable “heroes” of modern sport. KP has the ability to play that special knock, but how good is he really?

If we look at the last 5 years and all cricket played there is a standout comparison with AB de Villiers. Both have come to the fore as key players for their teams and featured regularly. KP has played 161 matches vs AB who has played 160. It is KP that has more innings at the crease leading AB by 192 vs 184, however when we look at runs scored AB has a healthy lead with 8007 vs 7373. In terms of averages it is again AB that towers over KP with an average of 54.10 vs 42.37. Granted that AB has had more T20 exposure it still begs the question, how “great” is Kevin Pietersen really.

In terms of runs scored across all formats of the game in the last 5 years, KP sits in a very respectable 12th position, while his average is rather unimpressive in comparison. So in overall terms it seems KP is pretty useful as opposed to outright brilliant. If we take a closer look at the various formats individually, is there any improvement in his claim to greatness?

T20 – this is where we can acknowledge the brilliance of KP, with 1007 runs at an average of 43.16 and a strike rate of 141.23, he is undoubtedly the premier T20 batsman in International Cricket. Only Brendan McCullum has scored more runs (1228), the next bet average of those with more than 20 innings is the 40.20 of Eion Morgan. Likewise it is Shane Watson that eclipses his strike rate with an exceptional 153.23 in his 26 innings. (Of interest is Virender Sehwags impressive 157.73 in 15 matches). So yes like in real life KP has the flash in the pan flair for both headlines and T20 cricket.

ODI – can his sheer talent carry over to the longer format of ODI cricket, let’s have a look. KP has chalke up 2116 runs in his 68 ODI innings, this trails Ian Bell’s 2134 in 65 innings. Even Brendan Taylor from Zimbabwe outclasses KP with an impressive 2511 runs from 69 innings. So KP is way off the radar here, not even better than his team-mates. England started winning this format without KP and perhaps his record shows why. Just of interest is his ODI average of 34.68 sees him in 7th place for the last five years. Seems the challenge of the longer format is a little too much for KP. It is looking like his career a few flashes and cocky soundbites with little substance to his claims?

Tests – where we separate the wannabees from those who truly are world-class. KP ranks an impressive 6th with 4178 runs scored in this period. Ironically he trails England teammate Alistair Cook (4887) who tops the list for the 5 years past. His average however lets him down and at 47.47 he slips to 21st of batsmen with 20 or more test played. So yes he can play a bit, but is he consistent enough to be deemed great?

Compared to his own team-mates he has not been Englands best ODI or Test batsman in the last 5 years, by global standards he has been good, but not great. So the question begs is he worth all the drama?

With Heyneke Meyer having announced his Springbok squad for the Rugby Championships with only a single foreign based player in Ruan Pienaar, I thought I would look at a selection of those that missed out due to foreign commitments:

1. Heinke vd Merwe – having won his 1st (and only so far) Springbok cap vs Wales as a replacement in 2007, the then 22 year old continued to develop in to a strong candidate for future Bok honours. A two year deal with Leinster has seen him win 62 caps in Europe. Having just turned 27 he could yet add to his Springbok tally in the next few seasons, especially should he chose to play at home.

2. Schalk Brits – the livewire Saracens hooker has 3 Bok caps in the bag and adds a dynamic edge to the forward pack. He has received glowing praise in Europe and is undoubtedly a world-class hooker.

3. BJ Botha – the Munster tighthead is an experienced Springbok and edges out Brian Mujati, who himself has been in prolific form for Northhampton.

4. Bakkies Botha – the enforcer is still playing good rugby in France and with 76 tests is the second most capped Bok lock behind Victor Matfield.

5. Johan Muller – has become an integral member of the Ulster squad that played in this years Heineken Cup final, he may only have 24 Test caps, but this is more testament to the dominance of the Botha/Matfield combination during his time.

6. Pedrie Wannenburg – offers versatiltiy in being able to play 6,7 or 8 and along with Muller was a vital cog in the Ulster team this season.

7. Danie Roussouw – the abrasive veteran of 63 tests offers more versatility and an imposing presence.

8. Joe van Niekerk – has enjoyed some of his best form in the last few seasons playing in France and is another who no doubt could have added to his tally of 52 Tests had he stayed in South Africa. Joe would also be my choice of captain, a role he has filled with success before.

This forward pack would offer some real grunt, while the loose forward trio has a good balance of pace, power and skill. Lineout options are a major strength with all three loose-forwards offering options at lineout time. The bench would include Brian Mujati, Ritchardt Strauss, Alistair Hargreaves and Ryan Kankowski.

With Ruan pienaar picked by Meyer at 9 I have ruled him out of contention.

9. Fourie du Preez – the little maestro is world-class and with 62 Test caps is second only to Joost vd Westhuisen in the No.9 jersey. He also fills the role of vice-captain in this selection.

10. Peter Grant – the Stormers general has had a great Super rugby season and has 5 Bok caps as a replacemnt, though many feel he has deserved more.

11. Brent Russel – capped 23 times by the Springbok, his versatility has seen him play fullback, wing and even flyhalf.

12. Wynand Olivier – recently signed for the Ricoh Rams in Japan and this could mean he will forfeit adding to his tally of 37 Bok caps.

13. Jacques Fourie – 69 Tests and arguably one of the best 13′s to have played for the Boks. He is another versatile player capable of covering the wing and fullback, where he made his start in professional rugby.

14. Tonderai Chavangha – the Zimbabwean born speedster has the best try scoring ratio in Bok history, despite only 4 caps he has dotted down 6 times.

15. Conrad Jantjies – the 24 Test fullback rounds out our starting 15 and offers experience and solidity at the back.

The bench sitters are Michael Claasens, Derrick Hougaard and uncapped Sam Gerber.

This selection reflects the depth of talent spread across the globe and if we consider there are scores more players plying their trade abroad, South Africa is a veritable powerhouse when it comes to producing quality rugby players. With a tough as teak pack and exciting backs that can play off Grant this team would certainly not embarass themselves against any opponent.

The Super Rugby qualifiers on Saturday served up two matches that illustrated the gulf between the playing styles exhibited in the competition. The Bulls have been succesful with their particular brand of rugby in the past, but the Crusaders have again shown that if countered it very quickly becomes a losing gameplan. Granted that if executed well enough it can overcome the more dynamic style favoured by our southern adversaries, but the Bulls stumbled their way out of the competition with barely a moments excitement. The failure of the senior players to stamp their authority on the game was alarming and will give Heyneke Meyer a massive concern going in to the Rugby Championship. Pierre Spies has failed to impress as anything but a flat track bully, while the decision making of Francois Hougaard has room for improvement, but it is Morne Steyn that worries the most. Not only has his goalkicking radar gone awry, but his normally impecable kicking out of hand has begun to wobble. This key axis must fire for the Bulls to be succesful and by extension the Springboks.

The Sharks stunned the Reds playing a more expansive gameplan and though consistency has been a problem, they are irresistable in full flight. The impact of their dynamic backrow, runners like Willem Alberts and ability to mix it up in the backs showed the merit of a multi-faceted gameplan. Individually and as a team the Sharks showed the ability to think on their feet and for the most part make the right decisions. Michalak and McLeod were instrumental in stamping the Sharks gameplan on the Reds, albeit behind a rampant forward pack. The contrast of these performances will highlight to Meyer that he can’t simply rely on Steyn and his usually unerring boot. There is no other flyhalf with the kicking ability of Steyn, but there are many that offer a greater spread of talents. His decision on who to keep in reserve will be crucial, if Steyn doesn’t regain form Meyer will be forced to look at alternatives that are better at playing a style more akin to Sharks rugby than the pattern favoured by Meyer and the Bulls.