NZ is abuzz with race quota allegations been made by an ex-All Black.

Prime Minister John Key has labelled Andy Haden’s racial quota claims about New Zealand’s most successful rugby franchise as “factually incorrect” and “offensive“.

The PM was questioned by media when in Auckland today about the growing controversy over former All Black Haden’s claims that the Crusaders have a policy of limiting the number of Polynesian players in their teams to just three.

Mr Key said Haden was meeting Sports Minister Murray McCully in Auckland this afternoon about Haden’s role as an ambassador to next year’s Rugby World Cup in New Zealand.

He added that Haden’s use of the word “darkies” to describe Polynesian players “was not alright“.

“My view on that is that the comments are not only factually incorrect but they are also offensive,” he said.

The claims were made in a panel discussion by former All Black Andy Haden on The Deaker Show on Sky TV on Wednesday night. Other panel members were former All Black Chris Laidlaw and former Waikato and Springboks player Kevin Putt.

The topic was “the browning of New Zealand rugby”.

Haden said “it [the topic] was not a big issue in Christchurch“.

“Once they’ve recruited three, that’s it. That’s their ceiling. Three darkies, no more.

“In the Crusaders manual, there it is, it’s enshrined in their articles and they’ve stuck by that. And they know damn well that that’s the case. And it’s worked.”

Haden stood by his comments on Radio New Zealand’s Nine to Noon this morning but softened slightly, saying he was referring only to Polynesian players, not Maori.

He said he had no doubt the Crusaders had the policy but admits he was overstating the case when he said it was written in stone.

On Newstalk ZB, Haden said: “No, I don’t regret it. I think it needs debating. Everyone gets very PC about this but the reality is the Crusaders have a different mix from everyone else and there’s got to be a reason for that.”

He added his accusation was provoked by discussion on a chapter in Laidlaw’s book in which the author examined the differences between the Crusaders and Hurricanes, who have a heavy Polynesian mix.

“I’m aware that they have people in the franchise who have discussed this selection method, not including Polynesians, particularly across the academy,” Haden told Newstalk ZB.

“Whilst somewhat facetiously I said it was in writing and chiselled into tablets and brought in on horses in saddlebags before matches that was taking a bit of light-hearted look at it.

“But I know that subject is debated on a regular basis at the Crusaders.”

Haden said he stood by his “sources” from within the Crusaders organisation who had told him unbidden of the racial recruitment policy, but had no interest in revealing their identities.

He said he only made the allegation because “I had discussed it with members of Crusaders franchise before”.

He said he would be prepared to swear in a court of law “that I have discussed that, and I didn’t bring the subject up. It was volunteered to me by someone from the Crusaders franchise”.

CRUSADERS’ REACTION

Haden’s comments have attracted dismay from current and former Crusaders-connected personnel.

Current Crusaders’ coach Todd Blackadder said he had been involved with the Crusaders a long time, and had never seen any evidence Haden was right.

It was unfortunate the comments had been made because they brought the game into disrepute and hurt people and reputations, he said.

Haden should front up on his source if he was making such wild claims, Blackadder said.

The Crusaders team, beaten in the semifinals by the Bulls last weekend, included Pacific Islanders Kahn Fotuali’i, Robbie Fruean and Ti’i Paulo, as well as players with Maori ancestry – Dan Carter, Sean Maitland, Zac Guildford, Thomas Waldrom, Tim Bateman and Daniel Bowden.

This issue was discussed on national television tonight and one of the sport journalists stated bluntly that this issue is not new and has been part of rugby talk in NZ for many years.

People would say things like to much coconuts in the Blues and Hurricanes that’s why there is no consistency in those teams. Or they would say the team(s) lack some whiteys in decision making positions.

When confronted whether he have heard these sort of talk the NZRU representative Steve Tew said he have heard it but that is just redneck talk.  

My primary feelings regarding this game is one of relaxed curiousness as I don’t really care who wins. It is enough for me that an SA team is going to win the S14.

I have been a Stormers supporter for as long as I can remember and was very anti Northern Transvaal during the isolation years.

Lately –with the bulls being the torch carrier of SA rugby-I did develop sort of positive feelings towards the bulls.  The bulls have stood out as a team that adjusted best to stricter rule interpretations and as an innovative team; a team that is taking the game forward.

Bulls are an innovative team

What I particularly like about the bulls is that they play according to their strengths and that they come up with innovative plays within that context. They are not trying to play for the pavilion or like anybody else but have embraced and enforced their own unique style. The bulls have also proven during this season that they are a multi-dimensional team that can adapt the way they play during a match. They can vary their attack, they have patience with the ball in hand and they are clinical in execution.

Bulls have self-belief and can enfoce a game plan

The bulls have also proven that they trust their game plan and that they don’t go panicky but most importantly they have self-belief and can patiently enforce a game plan even when behind on the scoreboard. This is not something I’ve seen with the Stormers. The Stormers inability to lift themselves against the Sharks was in particular a shocker.

Stormers are predictable and streotype on attack

The Stormers have come a long way and have scored some magnificent tries this season; mostly from counter attacks although there was some classic tries from set-piece during the second part of their S14 campaign. They rely a lot on defence and on Aplon and Pietersen to create opportunity. Their defence focus on dominating at the breakdowns but mostly by keeping the ball in hand preventing the opposition to use the ball. Their attacking play resolve around ruck and maul from the line-out and/or starter moves from the scrum involving Grant, Fourie and mostly Januarie (when he comes on).  For these moves to work they need a right shoulder in the scrum; which is a problem against good opposition as the Warathahs have demonstarted. Lastly they have shown good ability to keep the ball in hand and rotate the ball through phases.

Stomers have shown vulnerability when dominated in the scrum and at the breakdowns

The game against the Sharks has illustrated the Stormers dependence on having the ball and dominating at the breakdowns. I have not seen the same ability or innovative strategies to break the defence line with the Stormers as is the case with the bulls. They rely a lot on rotating the ball untill there is an opening on the oustide.

So, to summarise the Stormers play. They require:

1. To dominate at the break downs
2. A right shoulder in the scrums
3. Ruck and mauls at the line-out
4. Poor tactical kicks by the opposition on Aplon and Pietersen giving them space to run
5. To string in quite a substantial amount of phases and to keep the ball in hand.

Stormers tight five will be out-muscled by the bulls and therefore will not be able to get into a rythm 

I don’t think the Stormers are going to get any of the above mentioned 5 points against the bulls. The bulls pack will out muscle them at the breakdowns and in the scrums preventing them from getting front foot ball and to execute starter moves from set piece.

The stormers will not dominate at the lineout. The lineout will be an even contest I think but I don’t think they will be able to drive the bulls back when they try and ruck and maul from the line-outs.

Bulls won’t give Aplon and Pietersen any space to razzle and dazzle

Aplon and Pietersen will be boxed in when the bulls kick and charge. I think also the bulls is going to dominate like the sharks to such and extend that they will not allow the Stormers to come into the game.

Well that just how I see the game. I don’t really care who wins as long as it it is a cracker.

East London was the AB’s next stop for a match against a South African rural XV. The Kiwi’s experienced the hotel owner smug, a bit of a stuck-up and full of self-importance. They found it very amusing when, one Gielie de Kock -a white journalist with a dark skin- was chased out of the hotel with a group of coloured suppoters keen to meet the All Blacks.

It was amusing because it illustrated the absurdity of race classification on the basis of skin colour; an absurd system which in reality -as the case demonstrates- was a can full of worms. Gabriel David and Terry McLean (the writers whose books I use as my primary sources) both went on a trip to the Transkei and Umtata where they had the opportunity to interview Chief Matanzima head of the Transkei. The object of the interview was to assess the black people’s views on the homeland policy. Chief Matanzima was at that time apparently positive about homelands and was of the opinion that the black and white populations must not integrate.

About Chief Matanzima Gabriel David writes:

This serious-minded Xhosa with penetrating eyes that rarely soften with humor is not quite the puppet that Pretoria would like him to be. He is a supporter of separate development just as long as the Transkei is allowed to be a self-determining nation.

He appreciates the important fact that the Bantu and the white could never integrate and, in fact, is quite adamant, that there should not be any union or merging society. He jealously guards the culture of the Bantu and fears it would be lost if there was integration.

The principal problem facing Matanzima is to persuade the Xhosa people that the Transkei is their home and that they should live within the border. The Bantus are still pouring into the Big South African cities where top wages are being paid.

19 August 1970: All Blacks 45; SA Country districts 8

Bryan Williams scored three tries, 4 conversions and a penalty for a personal contribution of 20 points in this match. Spectators, according to Gabriel David, left the field convinced that Williams defeated the SA Country districts team on his own. Gabriel David was of the opinion that the mopped-up SA Country district team never had a chance against a well drilled All Black pack especially when by the direction of the South African Rugby Board, Visagie, Ellis, Bates and Mannetjies Roux were removed from the Country District team.

Terry McLean in his book (Battling the Boks) wrote this about the team that eventually played for the Country Districts:

Fact is that all of the Country District’s team except Meiring on the left wing had already played against the All Blacks. In theory this team should have been hot stuff –despite the above mentioned omissions- especially in the forwards, who nicely blended size, speed and experience.

Daan Ackerman (Springbok trialist) and Jannie van Aswegen (Junior Springbok) the locks had been a considerable success for Western Transvaal and Griqualand West respectively, Piet van Deventer had been as slick as a chick off the Griquas’ backrow and, of course, Lofty Nel with his height had played a decisive part in the fine play of Western Transvaal in the back of the lineout.

It was to admitted that Niewoudt, of Boland wasn’t the best flyhalf in the world, but hadn’t Dirkie de Vos (Ex Springbok – No9), a great little character and superbly brilliant kicker, rocked the All Blacks for most of their very trying day against Western Transvaal by the length, height and accuracy of his kicking?

The two Boland props (van der Merwe and O’Kennedy) were also instrumental in the Boland match when they out scrummed the All Blacks.

The full Country District team was: D Visser (Boland); K Meiring (Far Northern Transvaal); F Cato (Western Transvaal); I Schaap (Western Transvaal);  N Smith (South West Africa); H Niewoudt (Boland); D de Vos (Western Transvaal); M Jennings (Boland, Capt); Lofty Nel (Western Transvaal); J Van Aswegen (Griqualand West); D Ackerman (Western Transvaal); Piet van Deventer (Griqualand West); D van der Merwe (Boland); R Mundell (Rhodesia); J O’Kennedy  (Boland). 

Jannie van Aswegen the Griqualand West lock forward pictured here with his Gazelle jumper when he was selected as Captain of a Junior Springbok team that went touring to Argentina; he never played for the Springboks.

Gaselle team to Argentina led by Jannie van Aswegen. Whether the team ever went on tour and how they fared, I don’t know.

The All Black team fro this match can be seen here.

Terry McLean writes as follows about this match:

Someone of orthodox mind –was it Professor Daan Swiegers, the Springbok selector?- had taken over the country team so firmly that de Vos, a truly original mind, had been turned from a kicking into a passing halfback. It was rather sad to see Dirkie so hamstrung.

Urlich scoring for the All Blacks agains Country Districts with Dirk de Vos trying to stop him

Laidlaw was tactically brilliant behind a pack that played like a well oiled machine. The All Blacks demolished the Country Districts team and scored 10 tries of which 6 was converted. All Blacks who scored in this match were Davis, Williams (3), Milner, Urlich (2), Holmes, Smith, MacRae. McCormick kicked two conversions and Williams four as well as a penalty goal.

Had not McCormick struggled so much with his place kicking -being successful with only two out of 5 kicks- the All Blacks could have won with a much larger margin than the 45 points they accumulated. It was in the fiftieth minute, or thereabouts, that Lochore whistled up Williams to take the kicks, writes Terry McLean.

McLean continues his narrative on Williams kicking as follows:

In his practice kicking, the Wizard of Ponsonby had been walking back five, seven, sometimes eight steps and his timing had not been good. Thinking things out for himself, he had decided to reduce his approach run to four steps. Williams missed the first attempt, to a try by Holmes. He missed another, an attempt at a penalty from 55 yards. And then, in five shots, he hit the target five times. Beautiful kicking. Solid as a rock.

Van Deventer (Flanker) scored a try for the Country District team which Visser (No15) converted. Visser also kicked a penalty.

Piet van Deventer

Dr. Craven made a dramatic and at times emotional speech at the post match reception in which he asked the media to stop writing that the third test will be a blood bath. Gabriel David wrote:

“Please do not strain the good relations between rugby South Africa and New Zealand,” he pleaded. He pointed out that an incident lasting five seconds (Nomis/McCormick incident) had been blown out of all proportion.

Craven went on and stated that he thinks McCormick were wrongly portrayed by the media as an nasty and aggressive rugby player and that he would welcome McCormick any day with open arms at Stellenbosch University (Maties) if he would which to play for Maties.

From East London the All Blacks travelled to Durban for their match against Natal.

22 August 1970: All Blacks 29; Natal 8.

Two stories –one before the match and one after the match that somehow got intertwined- dominated the media reports of the Natal game. The first story was the fact that the All Blacks was absolutely crazy about Durban and some players have made comments such as: We’ll play the rest of the games here if we had a choice.

The media was wondering why the All Blacks were playing only one match in Durban. After the match Tommy Bedford provided them with an answer which raised a few eyebrows and which many believed cost him his place in the Springboks team announced the following morning. Lofty Nel was brought back –after having last played for the Springboks in 1965 and despite a relatively weak performance for Country Districts earlier that week- on No8 in the place of the injured Albie Bates. This was a shocking choice as Bedford –a previous Springbok captain- was not only in sterling form against the All Blacks for Natal but was also regarded by many as the best No8 in the country. The speculation was that his post match speech was the reason for his non selection and specifically his statement that Durban did not receive more All Black matches because Natal was seen by the Afrikaner government as the “the last outpost of the British empire”.

Two Ex-New Zealanders played for Natal in this match, namely Terry Mehrtens (Andrew Mehrtens’ father who was a former Canterbury and junior All Black flyhalf) played fullback for Natal and Peter Hatchwell (former Wellington wing) on the wing. Hatchwell, according to one newspaper predicted that Natal was going to win.

The Natal team who played in this match were: Terry Mehrtens; Hannes Viljoen; PK Hatchwell; R Greyling; Tubby Hannaford; RM Seymour; CR Holm; Tommy Bedford (Captain); PC de Jager; CC Dannhauser; MC Janse van Rensburg; RS Steyn; DV Hooper; K Parkinson; FP Jackson.

The All Black team for this match can be seen here.

There was no doubt among Durban sports journalists that the AB should win this match.

The AB won fairly easily at the end, but did not impress as a team; they were unorganised; made many unforced and basic errors and were untidy in execution of primary tasks. Kirton was unsure at 10, and Laidlaw did everything but being his normal precise and calculative self. Sutherland, Lister and Meads were slow at the breakdowns and Thorne the All Blacks primary playmaker was slow, lethargic and had an uncharacteristically lazy day. Sounds almost as if they had too much of a good time in the “Last outpost” and forgot they were there to play rugby. The team, however, was good enough to regain focus and dominate play in the second half to such and extend that the record books shows a score line that suggest an easy win.

Hannes Viljoen and Tommy Bedford were outstanding for Natal. Viljoen, according to David scored the best two tries to date by an opposition player against the AB. Bedford played a game that must have shaken the SA selectors, according to Gabriel David.

Tommy Bedford who had an outstanding game for Natal against the 1970 All Blacks. Bedford played a total of 25 tests for South Africa. He played in four tests against the British home unions during the 69/70 end year tour but made himself very unpopular with a notorious speech in which he stated that Natal was seen by the Afrikaners as “The last outpost of the British Empire“. Bedford played his last two tests for the Springboks in 1971 against France.

Hannes Viljoen left the All Blacks for dead and ran in two brilliant tries for Natal. Viljoen played in three tests for South Africa against Australia during the 1971 unbeaten tour. He scored two test tries on tour but overall something like 16 tries in 10 matches.

This is how Gabriel David describes the two Hannes Viljoen tries:

The best try of the match came when Greyling, a strongly-built centre, switched the attack to the left wing and gave Viljoen the overlap. The tall winger streaked down the line for a rewarding 40-yard run. Hannaford converted for Natal.

In the 32 minute Viljoen again got the overlap and again outpaced everyone with another 40-yard dash and scored in the corner.

Tubby Hannaford played for Natal on centre he was also the kicker; converting one of the two Hannes Viljoen tries. Hannaford, if I remember correctly, followed Naas Botha in 1981 to the U.S.A to go and play American football for money.

The try scores for the All Blacks were Davis (3), Lister and Milner. Kember converted 4 of the 5 tries and Laidlaw kicked a drop goal.

Viljoen scored two tries for Natal of which one was converted by Hannaford.

About Tommy Bedford not being selected for the Springbok team for the third test Gabriel David has the following:

How those Durban papers yelped at the omission of Bedford and I must say that they had just cause. Bedford is a far more constructive No8 than Nel whose main asset is his ability to capture the ball at the end of the lineouts. Will the Springbok selectors rue their shock choice? The All Blacks sincerely trust so.

Lofty Nel who were brought in ahead of Tommy Bedford to play eightman for the Springboks in the third test.

Cape Town was the next destination for a game against a Combined Southern University team.

25 August, 1970: All Black 20; Southern Universities 3.

By direction of the South African Rugby Board Ian McCallum and Gert Muller were removed from the Southern University team to play the All Blacks. Ian McCallum could well have made the difference as Jaekel the Maties fullback landed only 1 of six very kickable downwind penalties. However both McCallum and Muller were left out as a consequence of the wrangling between the two selection committees, University of Cape Town and University of Stellenbosch. Maties end up with 12 of the 15 players.

The University team had quite a formidable side even though consisting of mostly Maties. The team were: O Jaekel; Andy van der Walt; Johan Walters; Johann van der Merwe; Jannie Engelbrecht (Captain); Dawie Snyman; François de Villiers; Piet le Roux; John le Roux; G Watt; Frik Burger; J Coetzee; Rampie Stander; S van Straten; Derek van den Berg.

Johann van der Merwe the one centre played for the Springboks in one test on the 69/70 end-year-tour); Johan Walters the WP centre was an outstanding player -both McLean and Gabriel David absolutely raved about him; the wings were both former Springboks namely Andy van der Watt and Jannie Engelbrecht. Dawie Snyman –not a Springbok yet but soon to be- was on flyhalf; the two props R Stander and D van den Berg could have been Rampie Stander and Derek van den Berg both later become Springboks. The J Coetzee on the flank was in all probability Jan Boland Coetzee.

The All Black team who played in this match can be seen here.

About this game David writes:

… a well-drilled Southern Universities’ side rocked the All Blacks for a good part of this match at Newlands today. For the first time on tour, including the tests, the All Blacks had to concede lineout possession while the students showed some fine attacking flairs in the backline that made the opposition look fairly mediocre. Fortuitously, the All Black forwards dominated the second phase play and control in this department saved the day.

The universities team certainly gave the All Blacks stiff opposition and Terry McLean has the following to say about individual performances:

When Jannie Engelbrecht was named captain of Southern Universities team, citizens clapped hands to brows and asked what the world was coming to when Universities’ teams had to be led by Methuselah’s.  Methuselah my foot. Jannie ran like the wind himself. His form was nearly as good as it had ever been. What was more, he was now capable of holding passes, an elementary feat which had always tended to trouble him in his palmy days. What was more, his mana, his prestige, his vast experience, had communicated totally to the universities’ players. From the moment of kick-off, these were no small boys in short pants. These were student princes, every one of’em.

Burger at 3 in the lineout gave the All Blacks the licking of their lives. Coetzee ran out of steam towards the finish –little wonder, considering that he ran 20,000 meters at 1 500-metre time- bit in partnership with the Rouxs, Peet and John, who was not related, he sailed into Going, Furlong and Cottrell as if borne by the breeze at its blowsiest. De Villiers the tine halfback, was smartness personified and Walters in midfield played in such a way that one wondered at the sanity of the Springbok selectors in overlooking him.

David makes the following observations about the game:

Two tries in the first half when the tourists were battling into the gale force wind were the commendable features of the game and after leading 11-3 at the interval it looked as though the All Blacks would run up another handsome victory. But the Universities’ team tightened its foreward drive, played with economic initiative in the backs and only splendid goal kicking by Kember made the winning margin respectable.

The ground was soft with pools of water dotted about and one would have thought that such conditions would be relished by the New Zealanders. In point of fact, the All Blacks appeared bogged down and never really got into stride.

Danie Craven’s unwillingness, as president of SA Rugby and as a representative of Stellenbosch University -who had 12 players on the team- to attent the after match reception left the impression with the AB-team that he was a little sour about the result. This perception was confirmed when the bus driver remarked that he overheard Craven saying in Afrikaans: “You can’t beat 16 men”.

All Blacks 20 points (tries Urlich, Davis and Going; conversation Kember, penalties Kember 3). Southern Combined Universities 3 points (penalty Jaekel).

Will they or won’t they? Will the Crusaders continue to play their high risk-high reward rugby, or will they bring out the stodgy stuff for the weekend’s Super 14 semi-final against the Bulls?

It’s fast shaping as one of the main talking points of the build-up to the highly anticipated Soweto showdown between two teams who have won the last five Super rugby titles between them.

Matfield reckons come semi-final time bonus points doesn’t count and low risk rugby wins these types of matches.

The messages out of the Kiwi camp continue to pledge persistence with the all-out attack policy of recent weeks.

I think the Crusaders will keep doing what they did in the previous match against the bulls namely quick throw-in to avoid line-outs, driving up in the line-outs to prevent the mauls, spoiling in the scrums with all sort of illegal stepping, turning the scrums and mauls and running from deep with numbers out wide as well as rushing up to the pods.

However I think they are going to mix it up this time round namely play the game in quarters with a slightly different focus in each quarter. For the first 15 minutes they are probably going to kick for territory but will be waiting for poor tactical kicks to counter from deep. In the middle part of the first half they are probably going to smash it up with occational short passes to forwards and backs running at angles on to the ball as well as some blindside probing by Ellis. Last quarter they’ll try something else like lifting the tempo and watch-out for the corner kick by Carter with Thorne out on the wing to gather the ball. Both the Bulls wings (Hougaard and T-shirt) are short so the corner pass-kick to the wing and the up-and -under that drops on the goal line is certainly on.

First 15 minutes of the second half they are going to kick for corners to set-up play close to the bulls goal line and smash it up with the corner kick eventually if they can’t get through.

In the last quarter of the match they are going to try and deprive the bulls of ball; if behind they are going to run everything out wide with some occasional smashing up with angled runners to pull in the drifting defence. If in front they are going to try and keep the ball in hand and slow the game down.

How should the bulls approach the game?

Play to strengths; kick for corners (into the pavilion) forcing line-out close to the Crusaders goal line; ruck and maul from the line-out but throw on 4 and 5 and try and force penalties. Use the pods sparingly and mostly as a decoy or as a block for a Steyn drop kick. Some variations with the pods close to the Crusaders goal line like they did against the chiefs namely having two pods and using an angled runner to steam in occasionally between the two pods. To make the pods work the bulls need to make sure they have the defence on the back foot (retreating) before playing the ball to the pods. So drive the ball up from the line-out before sending it to the pods or get a good right shoulder in the scrum with Spies taking it up before sending it to the pods. The pods can’t stand still and wait for the ball but need to run onto the flat pass so that they have momentum when receiving the ball.

The Bulls know the crusaders are going to run the ball from deep so well placed box kicks which land in the 4 channel with defenders coming up quickly to box the ball catcher in, with the aim to force a mistake, is certainly on. They need to tackle the ball catcher or the first receiver when following up on the box kicks. In essence smother any counters before the ball goes through the second pair of hands as the third receiver will be out wide with numbers in support. The box kick will therefore have to be high and placed with pin point accuracy.

Well that just my thoughts on the matter. I am very keen to see how the respective teams are going to approach this match.

The weather was muggy, heavy and oppressive the mood in the Springbok camp morbid, heavy and oppressive and the two hour bus ride to Wanganui felt murderously long and oppressively uncomfortable. Unexpected and naughty humor from Hannes Marais lightened the day whose post test melancholy –worsened by hangovers of varying degrees of profundity- was deepened by the frigidity of the weather all over New Zealand.

Gielie de Kock “die Landstem” sport journalist on tour was the man that suffered under Marais’ ploy. The “Landstem” was known and notorious as a type of “Vice in the garments of Virtue” a sort of moral watchdog who specialized in putting stars and famous people under the spotlight with paparazzi style journalism in an attempt to act as protector of the truth or a higher moral code as they saw it. Gielie looking for sensational scoops, in accord with what his newspaper expected from him was therefore the ideal man for Hannes Marais’ con. Gielie was immediately very interested when Hannes Marais drew him aside and whispered: “Big news.” “They have found a queer in the touring party. Kobus is mad with rage. Tour committee had a meeting.” Gielie was dancing with excitement. “What? What is happing?” he wanted to know. Hannes pitched his voice even lower. “They know who it is,” he said. “Kobus is going to send the man home. Immediately. It is the story of your life.” Gielie was now unstoppable. “Tell me who it is! I must know. I demand you tell me. Who is it?” Marais leaned closer. “Give us a kiss, Gielie,” he said, “and I’ll tell you.”

Television has come to New Zealand –implemented only 5 years ago in 1960- and highlights of the first test was repeatedly shown and it was clear from the footage that the ball was propelled forward from Williment’s hands before Tremain picked it up to score. Several other referee blunders were also highlighted. Terry McLean takes a very philosophical position regarding the matter:

So What? Without the least possible doubt, though R. F. McMullen scored for the All Blacks against the Springboks in the rubber test of 1960 at Port Elizabeth, Ralph Burmeister, the extremely capable referee in charge of the game, said it wasn’t a try. So it wasn’t. Pat Murphy said Tremain’s was a try. So it was. That’s refereeing. That’s Rugby.

Springboks were quite discontented with an article featured in a South Africa newspaper stating that women from all over New Zealand is constantly calling the Hotel(s) –in which the Springboks are staying- to book rooms. This information was intertwined reprovingly with statements that players stay out late at night; the implication between the lines that the late nights was spend in the company of women. As can be seen in the photo’s below the ‘boks’ certainly did spent time in the company of the fairer sex.

Keith Oxlee and Lionel Wilson chat with two of the local beauties at the dance for the team at Rotorua. The Springboks were always popular with the fairer sex and dancing partners were never hard to come by.

Wilson, Nomis, Truter and Oxlee with two local girls relax in the sun as a launch whips them across one of Rotorua’s scenic lakes.

Frik du Preez and Abe Malan visited a stud farm where the photo below was taken among other things. Some of the Springboks went on duck and deer hunting trips and several tried their hands at sheep shearing. Stories of outstanding shooting and very average shearing -leaving sheep behind looking like honey combs- appeared in the newspapers. While the tales of remarkable marksmanship were uncovered as half-truths, the accounts of pitiable shearing performances proved to be the full truth.

Frik du Preez (on horseback) and Abie Malan during a visit to a stud farm in Wanganui.

August 4, 1965 – South Africa 24, Wanganui-King Country 19

Wanganui-King Country fielded a team with a formidable pack. The All Blacks locks Stan and Colin Meads, and two players who played for the Maori’s namely Bill Wordley on hooker and Jerry Paiaka on prop -the latter two players also were All Black trialists.

In the backline, scrumhalf Brain Cressy has played for the Maori’s while Phil Gaukrodger (wing) and Paul Tainui (centre) played in the recent All Black trials.

The Springbok team for this match was: Mulder, Truter, Men, Gainsford, Engelbrecht, Barnard, De Villiers (captain), Hopwood, Slabber, Goshen, Du Preez; Ellis; Marais, Malan, Parker.

The river city put its best has foot forward for this match and the weather was perfect except for a light drizzle towards the end;  16 000 people attended the game.

Wanganui, known as “the river city”

Map showing the location of Wanganui on North Island.

It was a game of two halves. In the first half the Springboks were brilliant and scored four tries with outstanding counter attacks and some brilliant individual running by the likes of Mans, Engelbrecht, Du Preez and Ellis. Halftime Colin Meads rallied his troops and the second half the Wanganui team came back in splendid fashion making it a very exciting affair for the spectators.

First points came after two minutes of play when the combined team gave away a penalty for offside play and Mulder kicked and easy goal. Ten minutes later, Ellis took an infield pass from de Villiers; slipping past several defenders with step and swerve before passing to Mans to score near the posts.

After sixteen minutes into the first half the Springboks took the ball down the right touchline before Engelbrecht finally round the move off after what looked like a forward. Mans converted. Thirty minutes into the first half Gainsford ripped the midfield defence open with an excellent line break before handing over to Du Preez to score near the poles. Mans again successful with the conversion.

McDonald (No15) succeeded for the combined team with a penalty after the Springboks have been guilty of obstruction. Tapsell (No14) broke through a few tackles shortly hereafter to score out wide; MacDonald missed with the conversion. Just before halftyd Engelbrecht break into space running well and when halted he handed to Ellis who crossed the goal line and ran around to score behind the posts. Mans converted. Halftime score 21-6.

Everything indicated that the Springboks were going to run away with the match in the second half. Colin Meads however rallied the home team to a splendid recovery that almost toppled the South Africans. After just four minutes into the second half Paiaka (No1) dived on the ball after a kick by Barnard was charged down. MacDonald converted. Form a scrum Maurice Rush (No7) crashed when the ball came out at the side of a scrum on the Springboks goal line. The conversion was successful. Two minutes the combined team won a lineout in the Springboks 25 yards area and Ingham (No10) landed a drop goal to bring the home team within two points of the Springboks score.

The crowd could now sense a local victory and went ballistic -every tackle and movement of the home team was loudly cheered. Seven minutes before full time Truter ran strongly against the left touch line and score wide out. This unconverted try sealed the victory of 24-19 for the Springboks.

Terry McLean described the last fifteen minutes and Truter’s try as follows:

With 15 minutes to play, Rush got a try from a scrum near the goal line beating both De Villiers and Ellis to the rolling ball; and if the ball somehow hadn’t quite extricated itself as it should from the scrum, not a man in the audience was prepared to care a hoot for niceties; especially after MacDonald had placed the goal to make the score 21-16.

Within a minute, Spriggens Park went stark, staring mad. Ingham saw the gap, ran into it and placed a long, spearing punt far to the left. The ball entered touch five yards from the Springbok corner-flag. Pandemonium. Paiaka, who had given the ball out for the first kick, gave it out again. When Ingham received it, he steadied before letting fly with a dropkick. Over she went, dead-centre, 21-19 and nearly 14 minutes to play. Could it be possible that Wanganui-King Country, a team of lowly estate, was going to win?

Very skilfully indeed de Villiers placed a kick ten yards from the Wanganui-King Country goal-line out of the clasping arms of tacklers.  The ball now fell behind the home side’s forwards. Cressy was overrun. Ellis and Malan hunted shoulder to shoulder. When the ball was checked, they had command of it. At the heel, de Villiers swept a pass to the left. Through two, three hands it fled, into the arms of Truter. Truter had been playing with unconscionable incompetence; now he swerved and sidestepped brilliantly past MacDonald before running in a try. By making the score 24-19, it removed the likelihood of the ‘Boks being beaten.

Truter at Wanganui, brilliant one moment incomprehensively clumsy the next moment. Truter in one of his brilliant moments scored the try which sealed the victory for the Springboks against Wanganui.

Mulder performed well at fullback, Engelbrecht and Truter was impressive with the ball in hand but suspect on defence. In the back Barnard impressed; Ellis and Hopwood was outstanding in the loose. The Springboks tight forwards struggled, Malan lost the hooking contest and the Springboks had no answer for the Meads brothers in the lineout.

The next few paragraphs in Terry McLean’s book “the bok busters” provides a good summary of the game:

There were two distinct phases in the build-up of excitement. The first phase was the Springboks’ quite brilliant counter-attacking, especially by Hopwood and super little Jannie Barnard, and the running of some superb tries in which Engelbrecht, an Engelbrecht of unbelievable sure hands, wafted about like a flying fantail.

In the second half there was extremely fine forward play by the Wanganui forwards with the two Meads brothers leading the charge. Collin Meads several times rose like the statue of Liberty and with the ball in one mighty paw fired passes of 20 yards into the backline.

There were some complaints….Paiaka messing about too much in the front of the scrum; Rush getting a try from a ball that hadn’t properly gone into the scrum; Paiaka’s try being disputed by Ellis with more vehemence than Anthony displayed over the dead body of Caesar; too much barging against the Springboks in the lineout, especially by that master barger, Colin Meads. All the usual things usual to a tough match in which one team managed to play a whole lot beter than it ever should have been allowed to. But, in sum this match was by far the most exciting of the tour.

August 7, 1965 – South Africa 26, Waikato 13

The Waikato match was greeted with great anticipation because the victory against the 1956 Springbok side has something of a cult status in New Zealand. That 1956 win is probably the most famous victory in the history of Waikato rugby if not New Zealand rugby.

Upon arrival in Hamilton, the Springboks found the city in rugby fever; a parade of 63 floats and a 1 mile long procession followed the Springboks through the streets on the way to their Hotel. The enthusiasm, fervour and expectations were enormous. The 1965 Waikato team were keen to life up to the expectations and the performance of their predecessors. The 1965 Waikato team was however not nearly as formidable as the 1956 team but the expectation was that they would give the ‘boks’ firm competition. Rex Pickering (No8) was the only All Black in the team and the only remaining player from the famous 1956 team.

Joe Porima (No1) was a New Zealand junior player as was Dave Flavell (No15). Ian Cathro (No9), Ray Wells (No. 12) and John MacKenzie (No14) was All Black trials players. Graeme Clarke (No5) was the brother of Ian and Don Clarke two famous All Blacks.

The Springboks rested most of their top players. The team was: Mulder, Mans; Brynard; Roux, Truter, Barnard, Smith (Captain), Slabber, Schoeman, Naude, Botha; Janson, MacDonald, Malan, Parker. Interesting was that Gertjie Brynard -actually a wing- was selected on centre with Mannetjies Roux.

The weather and field conditions were perfect and 30 000 spectators attended the game. Waikato was ahead 3-0 after a drop goal from Johnson (No. 13) at halftime. Within a minute after the start of the second half they increased their lead to 8-0 when Truter was caught in possession; the ball came loose; Johnson (No13) picked it up drew Mulder and gave it to Wells (No12) in space who ran over for a try which Flavell converted.

Truter in trouble against Wanganui. Against Waikato, he was also caught in possession leading to Waikato’s first try.

South Africa’s first points came after a forward rush that ended with a try by Naude near the poles. Mans converted and shortly afterwards Naude succeeded with a long range penalty to tie the scores. Botha the other lock forward burst through the defence shortly hereafter before handing to Schoeman who scored near the posts for Mans to convert.

Jannie Barnard scored the Springboks third try after a brilliant side-stepping run. Mans converted.

Waikato scored their third and final try when Pickering (No8) outstripped the defence after Kemp (No10) slipped though a gap left by Brynard. Flavell succeed with the conversion and with five minutes left on the clock the game was wide open until Smith capitalized -when Waikato dropped the ball after a daring move in their own 25-yard area- and scampered away for a try in the corner. Janson scored the ‘Boks’ sixth and last try after a drive and rush by the forwards. Mans converted to bring the final score on 26-13.

For the ‘Boks’ Macdonald was outstanding with good support from Naude and Malan. Schoeman stood out in the loose. Barnard was often brilliant, and Mulder gave another sound display at fullback. Mans kicked well and made several good runs.

Here are some selected paragraphs from Terry McLean’s book (The Bok busters) that provide a great synopsis of the game:

David versus Goliath. That was the way of it. Just before the battle reached halfway, David struck. 3-0. Soon after it had begun again, David struck again. 8-0. It was absurd. It was fantastic. It was wonderful. Thirty thousand for whom David was the star screamed with pleasure and anticipation. This could be ’56 all over again. Then Goliath, mighty Goliath, began to roll. When Mr. Millar blew his whistle to bring the contest to an end, Goliath had 26 points, David only 13.

The Springboks announced that they were getting sick of themselves by staging two fine runs in the 10^th minute of the second half. This was followed with a tight-head by Malan, Slabber, playing extremely well, jigged out of half-hearted tackles and Naude, taking his pass plunged over for Mans to goal.

The match started to turn slowly and grindingly in favour of the Springboks. Naude placed a penalty from 47 yards. Slabber, having been held by both Kemp and Catley, was allowed to depart and Schoeman, taking his pass crashed over for Mans to goal. Barnard with sidestep and speed went past three men in a run of 20 yards for a try Mans also goaled.

For a moment, Waikato came back into the game when Kemp went through a gap carelessly left by Brynard; and Pickering, backing up, saw the gap, ran trough it for 20 yards and scored amid the wildest elation, which was renewed when Flavell placed the goal.

One more wild move by Waikato, by Kemp, Johnson and others, ruined by an ankle tap by Roux, and then it was Springboks, Springboks, Springboks. First, Smith with a try after 20 yards of speeding down the blindside. Then Catley, just after being hurt, was caught by Naude, and Malan and Janson, backing-up, charged over for Mans to place the converted goal.

Rex Pickering score for Waikato; Pickering, the only All Black in the Waikato team; the only survivor of the 1956 team; the only player who scored against both the 1965 and 1956 Springboks.

On the recommendation that the AB should not miss the “magnificent scenery” of the Garden Route they cancelled their flights and travelled by bus to George for their next match against SWD.

Here’s what they thought of the Garden Route:

It was dreadfully dull by all reports and the players were bored. The return journey will be by aircraft.

An understandable reaction if one considers the scenery and natural beauty of NZ. The Garden Route is certainly within the SA context unique, but no comparison with what you find in NZ (as can be seen on the pictures below).

My first impression of the Garden Route was also one of disappointment, mainly due to expectations created by well-meaning Garden Route enthusiasts. It (the garden route and surrounding areas) is however something that grows on you and certainly one of the places I would visit again if I were to travel to South Africa. The AB made a visit to an Ostrich farm; fear of injury was the reason why players were not allowed to ride the ostriches.

The SWD game stood out because it was Colin Meads’ return game and the media were totally absorbed with that fact. In his book about the tour (Rugby and be Damned) Gabriel David writes as follows about Meads and this game:

Colin Meads trained hard at practice this morning and scowled his fiercest when it was suggested that he might like to pack with his good arm and thus protect his broken one. “I don’t want any favours.  I’m a member of the side and expect to do my task without any help” he replied.

Aggressive and authoritarian behaviour by the SAP led to riots and incidences of violence –for the second time during the tour- between the police and the Coloured community this time in George. The coloureds like the rest of SA wanted to see and experience the All Blacks and in their normal spontaneous and comfortable style were hanging on trees, telephone poles, fences and temporary stands in an attempt to see the game. The police however in their customary fashion wanted to fit everyone neatly within a particular area and with typical bombastic aggressive abundance knocked, hit and forced child, woman and old person with batons into their neat little world of black and white. The following comment from David largely summarizes the visiting Kiwi’s appreciation of the SAP’s demonstration of authority:

South African policemen can, now and again and not generally, but in specific instances, be as stupid and as intolerant as anyone. Indeed, more so on occasions. How easier would South Africa’s racial problems be solved if the police were more tolerant of humans irrespective of the colour of their skin?

Terry McLean in his book “Battling the boks” pulls no punches and expresses his feelings about the SAP’s treatment of the Coloureds as follows:

As riots go, the one which occurred in George was not too serious. But the events were still sufficiently disagreeable to leave a troubling impression about the relationships of the races of South Africa. As an example, they caused members of the New Zealand supporters’ parties to shout at the police, “you mongrels” and “You Dutch bastards”, and that sort of thing is not a common practice with supporters.

What appeared to us outsiders to happen was that the Coloured people after being pressed into their miserable space, and after watching their heroes of the All Black team, especially Meads and Milner and Going, performing well, were wound by no-side to the state when they simply had to release their excitement. The form they chose, a streaming across the field to the All Blacks, to touch them, to clap them on the back, to smile at them, was innocuous. The All Blacks were neither disturbed, nor dismayed.

No incidents would have occurred had not members of the Police Force decided to dismiss these people from the field. The methods they chose were offensive in the sense that they included batons and a viciously snarling police dog. But they were even more offensive in the sense that they were completely unnecessary.

They drove the Coloureds up the roads. It was a sour display of authority sans responsibility. The sourer part began when the Police Commissioner for a couple of days after the incident kept making official statements to the effect that the Coloureds had started up the fighting. I wish I could use a smaller word. Let me say, instead, that the explanation was balderdash.

All Blacks 36, South Western Districts 6.

David began his piece on the game against SWD in the following manner:

It was a strange thing, but very few of us could recall the score in this match five minutes after it ended. It was the game where Colin Meads returned to rugby, with broken arm, and what seemed more important was whether he would survive the exercise. “Had a couple of wrenches but unless there are complications, I am extremely happy,” was his verdict afterwards.

New Zealand won easily with imaginative, even daring rugby that worked –as they themselves acknowledged afterwards- because SWD had no identifiable defensive pattern or structure. Cottrell and Thorne had outstanding games, both playmakers thriving in loose games where the defence are not well organised. The All Blacks dominated up front in the tight phases as well as at the breakdowns and in the in the loose, the whole pack including Colin Meads therefore had solid games providing the backs with plenty of front foot ball. The SWD flanker, du Toit stood out and he scored a mentionable try in which he demonstrated good speed and determination. Fullback, de Kock also had a strong match; he impressed with his powerful left boot (line kicks and his goal kicking).

Try scorers for NZ were Holmes (2), Thorne, Milner, Urlich, Going, Cottrell and Dick; Kember converted 6 of these tries. Du Toit scored for SWD and De Kock was successful with a penalty.

The SWD team playing in this match were: G de Kock; G Pentz; D Gerber; F Stander; J Bester; S Conradie; L Calitz; S Jonker; D du Toit; A Laubscher; M Vlok; J Rademeyer; J Verster (Captain); G Olivier; I Swart.

The All Black team playing in this match can be seen here.

Run-up to the match against Western Province

With the controversial second test -which was played only the previous weekend in Cape Town- still fresh in memory, there was a real buzz in Cape Town in anticipation for the match against WP. The South African Rugby Board staged a “monster” of a “cocktail party for 380 rugby supporters on tour from New Zealand. Telephone calls made by South African rugby supporters to All black players was starting to become an embarrassment and irritation for the NZ team because of the aggressive nature and bombastic attitude of the callers. Two of the younger team members were delegated to “screen” the incoming calls and only emergency/important phone calls were transferred to the players.

All Black manager Ron Burk made a point of it to have a talk before the match started with the referee adjudicating the game against Western Province and specifically reminded them of rule 18A, which stipulates that a player is required to release and roll away from the ball the moment he were off his feet and on the ground.

About the Cape rugby supporters/experts David writes:

Funny people, these Cape Town rugby critics. All week they have been praising the Western Province side, saying how the team will run the ball, what dangerous backs will be fielded and what tough opposition the All Blacks can expect. This morning, the day of the match, every critic has predicted in his respective paper a convincing win for the All Blacks.

All Blacks 29, Western Province 6.

Western Province fielded a very good team with several current and previous Springboks and the expectation was that they would give the All Blacks stiff opposition.

The Western Province team for this match were: I McCallum; G Muller; J Walters; N Babrow; A van der Watt; M Lawless; F de Villiers; I Trope; M du Plessis; W Hugo; F Burger; A Coetzee; A Jansen; C Cockrell; JB Neethling (Captain).

With all the publicity on foul play there was extraordinary pressure on the referee to take control and not to allow the game to degenerate into a bloodbath or a boxing contest. As often happens in such situations, the referee (Mr Gys Wege), ended-up being over cautious and so focussed on “being-in-control” that he ruined a game that could have been an great spectacle.

Obviously conscious of the late tackling publicity following the second test, Mr. Wege penalized every tackle early, on time or otherwise. It was a shame for the match had the ingredients of being one of the greatest ever seen on Newlands.

However, there were moments of brilliance and flow and the All Blacks delivered one of their better performances on tour; especially in the second half when they scored 5 stylish tries. David writes:

The game will be remembered as “The Bryan Williams show.” Today he scored two magnificent tries, made two others and showed he was at least human by making another spectacular break but muffing the try with a stupid kick when Thorne was ranging outside him.

Bryan Williams was at his brilliant best against the WP. Here he hands-off the WP centre Nelson Babrow. John Gainsford -old Springbok centre- described Williams after the game as the best runner with a rugby ball that he has seen on a rugby field.

The NZ pack was outstanding while Kirton had a good game on 10 controlling the match tactically very well. The WP forwards played like an inspired pack in the first half and the half time the score was still 6 all. Walters on centre was Springbok material but his centre partner Nelson Babrow was suspect on defence. McCallum was outstanding at fullback and goaled a 50 meter penalty. Gert Muller on the wing did not get enough ball to make an impression.

Strachan endagering his own players with a wild leap in a line-out against Western Province.

Terry McLean on this match:

To the All Blacks the glory –how could this be denied when, against the most famous of all South African provinces, perhaps the most famous Rugby province in the world, they scored seven tries? But a little of the glory had to be milked off. Had not Province, after all, Walters, the centre with the sidewise scuttle and the sprint like a bursting bomb? Walters used the scuttle and the sprint a few times to diddle Cottrell –who in turn did some diddling in reply- and this probably put Cottrell out of the next test, which was a very sad thing to happen. But the blond-headed Stellenbosch man was a very fine player, indeed –certainly Springbok material and an ideal partner, as a not to skilled defensive player, for that tiger among tacklers, Joggie Jansen.

McCallum hoisted enormous penalty goals from the heavy turf; de Villiers a tiny lad, bravely bore with the black backrow, and among the forwards Coetzee on the flank was a whizzer, here, there and every old where. But what on earth induced the Province selectors to choose men as heavy as Jansen and Hugo and as lean and slender as Morné du Plessis. Worst of all, why on earth was Dr Louis Babrow permitting himself to continue as chairman of the selection committee when his son Nelson was a contender for the team.

Dick, Williams (2), Wylie, Thorne, Murdock and Milner scored for the All Blacks. McCormick, was successful with one conversion and two penalties. McCallum was the only point scorer for WP with two penalties.

The All Black team who played against WP can be seen here.

The Crusaders said before the match they had a specific game plan; they’ve spotted a weakness and have a game plan to exploit that weakness. As it is they won every facet of the game except the match. They scored more tries, had more possession, wasn’t beaten in the line-outs or the scrums, made more turnovers and spent more time in the bulls half of the field.

So what was the weakness they saw and what was the game plan?

The weakness they noticed was the bull’s vulnerability in channels 3 (between the outside centre and the wing) and channel 4 (outside the wing). Specifically the fact that neither Hougaard nor v/d Heever is great defenders –mostly because they are relatively speaking small and light- and that JL Potgieter are too slow for an outside centre. They exploited this weakness on both attack and as part of their defensive strategy.

I speculated on another site what this game plan could be and mentioned things like quick throw-ins to avoid line-outs; the back three hanging back to counter the bulls kicking game; playing the ball wide away from the bulls forwards; switching Carter and Bowden on attack and using Carter and Bowden as tactical kickers to pin the bulls in their own half. The Crusaders did most of that but they did some other quite innovative strategic stuff which I think is quite educational to review and ponder about. So let’s disect the Crusaders game plan.

On defense

1. The back three did hang back and waited for the kicks and retaliated by occationally kicking it back into space forcing the bulls to kick out. This allowed them to get the throw in and secure the ball in the line-out. Mostly they ran the ball back at the bulls.
2. They did throw the ball in quickly when the bulls kicked it out; occationally they kicked the ball into space after a quick throw-in but mostly they kept the ball in hand running at the bulls setting it up before taking it wide. They had players catching the ball outside the field of play on numerous occasions in order to be able make a quick throw-in. There were always back-up players waiting for the quick throw-ins.
3. In the scrums they stepped sideways on the bulls feeds to ensure the bulls get poor ball.
4. Turning the scrums was another ploy they used with success on the bulls scrum ball forcing Du Preez against the sideline.
5. They waited for Spies annoying habit of breaking away against the turn off the scrum an nailed him.
6. In the line-outs on the bull’s ball they didn’t really compete but drove the bulls back the moment the ball catcher landed forcing the bulls back and preventing them to go forward or starting a maul; this also put FdP under pressure. Mostly they tried to avoid line-outs and made sure they didn’t kick the ball out to prevent bulls getting a line-out.
7. When the bulls tried to maul they pushed the maul to the sideline and turned it so that the ball carrier, in the back, was forced against the sideline limiting his choices and space whenever he tried to brake away.
8. They also stepped away from the maul on occasion which forced the bulls to end the maul or get blown up for obstruction.
9. They countered the Pods very effectively with two strategies, one they waited for the Pods on the edge of the offside line in numbers and, two they rushed up and hit the Pods just when it started to form. The moment the ball carrier got the ball and before he could start running, set himself and being pushed from behind by his support they rushed into his face and smothered the Pod. The result was that the Pods couldn’t gain momentum and speed and in most cases the bulls players were still in an upright position busy setting themselves for the forward charge when the defenders rushed onto them. This was so effective that the bulls could never get over the advantage line with the pods and they stopped using the pods for most part of the game.
10. Their most important defensive strategy was to keep the ball in hand and not allowing the bulls to get momentum with the ball in hand. They prevented turnover when running with the ball by playing it wide and avoiding going to ground with it. This took the bull’s turnover specialist (Stegman and Potgieter) out of the match.

On attack

The main game plan and attacking strategy was to play the ball wide and attack channels 3 and 4 with numbers. They did this in the following manner:

1. The backline lined up a little deeper and they used blockers (forwards standing flat on the defensive line in front of the backline players) which allowed them to get the ball wide.
2. They used long passes (mostly only two or three passes) to quickly get the ball wide.
3. They had numbers waiting in dept out wide (mostly No 15, the opposite wing, the centre’s doubling back and one of the big forwards). They always had more players than the bulls out wide. Three of the four tries were created out wide because they attached the outside channels with numbers.
4. They varied this strategy of taking the ball wide with two long passes by having players (mostly the flankers and no 8 or Brad Thorne) coming from outside inwards on an angle to set the ball up. This drew the drifting defense in. They then quickly recycled the ball and send the ball wide with Ellis breaking on the blindside and 15 coming in at speed to create the man over situation.
5. Whenever they went into contact they recycled the ball only once or twice which kept the bulls big players and fetchers out of the game and limiting the risk of losing the ball.
6. In the line outs they didn’t take any risk and went for the safe throws on 4 and 5 and then spread the ball wide at speed away from the bulls pack.

Generally the whole Crusader team knew the strategy was to attack the outside channels and every one made sure they supported on the outside. They never allowed the bulls to get momentum because they kept the ball in hand. The bulls was tactically outsmarted and generally extremely lucky to came out with a win. The fact that they did pull through is probably due to the confidence in the team. The general expression of a good side would win if they have a bad day applies.

This one of the best games I’ve seen in many a year. I was absorbed and totally fascinated by the tactical stratagems unfolding as the match progressed. 

Check out the cartoon on Nonu featured in today’s Dominion post here in Nu Zolland.

This cartoonist has hit the nail squarely on the head, me think. Gordon Ramsay-that self-inflated foul mouth cook- is using the F-word daily on prime time TV to abuse people.

Nonu was not abusing anyone he was absorbed by intense after match emotions.

How is that when Ramsay use the f-word to abuse people it is acceptable on prime TV but when Nonu use it on radio-an outdated form of media coverage- it is suddenly something that is taboo and wrong.

“I guess there were some words after a tough game and there was a bit of emotions flying around,” a repentant Nonu said.

“I guess being professional sportsmen you have to be responsible for what you say. At the end of the day, it hurts a lot of people. I just want to apologise to all the fans out there and all the listeners.”

“It wasn’t meant to be like that but it was a bit of intense emotions coming out. I was just trying to speak the truth – it’s a shame it happened like that. “It was a tough game and that’s the way it came out.”

It’s questionable how offensive an expletive is straight after an emotion-packed sports match, but there is no doubt Nonu overstepped the mark in saying: “After they got a lead of I think it was 24-8 or something, f… we were on our tryline and f… everyone’s just, what was hitting us. And 60 minutes later we come on top and we scored a f…ing last-minute try to get a f…ing bonus point.”

Newstalk ZB and Radio Sport are both the subject of a formal complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority.

Nonu has been sanctioned by the Hurricanes and the New Zealand Rugby Union will call him into its offices this week to discuss his comments.

The 27-year-old’s mischievous streak is well known and he could still afford a laugh at his situation.

“I’ve got a few scars in the bottom, but I’m fine,” he said when asked if he’d been disciplined.

I suppose athletes should be made aware that they need to watch their language and luckily most people here in NZ sees it for what it was namely and exuberant overflow of emotions.

However, when is foul mouth self-inflated abusers like Gordon Ramsay going to be sanctioned to explain his abusive behaviour or is it OK if he does it?  

There is nothing that I despise more than people moaning about referees. Some people don’t watch rugby they watch the referee. I’ve been at games with people who will start complaining about the ref the moment the game starts and the only thing they notice and all they talk about for the entire game and afterwards is the referee.

How pathetic is that? The ref is only human and will make mistakes just like players but mostly the mistakes have a way of balancing out. I am not saying that poor refereeing should not be addressed but there is a point where it becomes whining.

Check out the article below by Mark Hinton addressed at the Crusaders. I like this guy’s attitude and I want to say: All those referee whining rugby supporters worldwide please take not.

Crusaders need to look within for answers – Mark Hinton

The Crusaders can still save their Super 14 season – but only if they quit the whining and start indulging in some brutal honesty.

It’s been a shock for someone who’s always been an admirer of this staunch southern franchise to listen to the way they’ve reacted to a second straight defeat on tour that’s put their now customary place in the playoffs under a massive threat.

Instead of buckling down and addressing their key issues after they copped a 42-14 lesson from the Stormers at the weekend, following on from their flat-out inept performance in Perth, all we seem to have heard is what a hard time they’re getting from the referee.

Well, boo-hoo, and someone pass me the tissues.

Reality check time. The Crusaders didn’t lose to the Force because they were picked on by the ref. They lost because they dropped ball, missed tackles, failed to execute accurately at the set piece and played like headless chooks.

And they certainly didn’t lose to the Stormers at the weekend – hang on, lose is probably being too kind, they were walloped – because Stuart Dickinson didn’t give them a fair go at the breakdown.

Though that’s what the Crusaders brains trust have been trying to sell in the aftermath of their Cape Town stumble.

It’s to be hoped this is just a smokescreen for some serious work going on behind the scenes addressing an array of shortcomings.

For if that’s not the case, the Crusaders’ run of eight straight playoff appearances, and 11 in the last 12 seasons, is about to come to a shuddering halt.

I guess it’s fashionable these days to blame the referees. Everyone’s been doing it this year, from Pat Lam to Matt Giteau to now Todd Blackadder.

You’ve got to blame someone I guess when your team loses, and sometimes, for whatever reason, people are reluctant to point the finger too close to home. At least publicly.

Refs are an easy target and a fortnight ago Steve Walsh proved just that when he appeared to lose control of a fairly heated match between the Waratahs and Brumbies in Sydney. The rights and wrongs of Giteau’s pointed public response can be debated endlessly, but the reality was the Brums got the raw end of a pretty average performance from Walsh.

2010 Stormer magic

Crusaders

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwQR1jORn9M

Blues

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dd1QZNMH610

Chiefs

First half

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MVWJBtcApY

Second half

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sc_BJMAq64A&feature=related

Highlanders

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXBxY1JVoB4&feature=related

Hurricanes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5qm3uAqjsg