Monthly Archives: February 2012

First three S15 matches 2012

Posted on by
3

This year it seems like a totally different competition with lots of new players entering the fray. That’s of course apart from the fact that the format changed yet again culminating in a tournament that will finish in August.

It is early days and way too soon to make any real deductions from these matches but there were a few things that stood out for me.

Blues –as always- looks formidable and real dangerous with the ball in hand. They did however struggle to handle pressure and the way to beat them might be to push them into the corners and apply pressure with box and stab through kicks behind the backline. Their defence seemed solid enough but then the Crusader backline did not impress without Carter. I thought that the Blues game came apart when inside centre Stanley got replaced with Weepu. The backline then started to play lateral and lost that directness on attack. That took Ranger and kie out of the match.

Teams will have to keep it tight against the Blues or they’ll run you rugged. Crusaders were very lucky to pull off a win but demonstrated once again what a classy outfit they are. They have that ability to win matches even if they don’t play particularly well.

I did not see much of the Brumbies/Force game but the Brumbies look like a team on the up with some new talent in the backline and clearly starting to develop some structure in the forwards. Force is the same old same old; posing a challenge but just not good enough to go all the way.

The Bulls and Sharks both showed signs of rustiness but got better as the game progressed. Bulls forwards showed signs of a pack that could develop into an impressive unit. Jandre Kruger was good in the line-out and it looked like the Bulls might be OK without Matfield in that department. I was also impressed with the work rate and ball carrying contributions of the two Bulls props. In contrast with the forwards the Bulls backline looked less fluent. It was Hougaard and Morné Steyn who were unable to get the backline moving. Hougaard as a player always impress me with his ability to run onto the ball, his work rate and his defence. He is a nippy character and a type of player who constantly asks questions from the opposition but as a playmaker he is not yet in the same class as FdP, for me. This is Hougaard biggest challenge I believe as he matures and lose that extra yard of pace. I am waiting to see if he develops into a player who can read a game and who has the ability to keep the pack on the front foot and vary his game in a way that keeps the opposition guessing. He made one or two little snipes but in general did not vary his game to the same extent that was so typical with FdP at his best.

In terms of the Sharks I thought they looked competitive in the first half but seemed to fade away in the second half. Michelak was under constant pressure due to the fact that the forwards rarely got continued ascendency at the rucks and tackle ball. JP Pietersen was a surprise on outside centre for me. I liked the way he put Mvovo into space with a nice little in and out and a good timed pass. Certainly the best outside centre play in that one move that I’ve seen for years from outside centres in SA. Too early to tell whether he’ll make it in that position on the big stage but there was a bit of promise; a touch of class reminiscent of what I’ve seen from Bruce Robertson in 1976.

Mother of all chokes

Posted on by
18

My prevailing thought during the South African innings and first 3/4 of the NZ innings was that the South African team look fragile. They lack that robustness of yester-year.

In after thought I think the Proteas is showing the Flap Caps (sounds better than Black Caps) way to much respect. There is a mindset of tentativeness in the protea camp which cost us the first match. The second T20 was a one man show with the youngster Levi doing what talented youngsters tend to do namely play their game and ignore the ‘reputations’ of the opposition.

In this third match we were on our way to score 200 runs (or close to that if not more) when De Villiers got injured. That and the run-out of Duminy derailed our effort.

Personally I think the gap between SA cricket and NZ cricket is larger than the Protea team seem to realise. Showing the flap caps so much respect is not the way to go. Go out there and demolish them and get done with it.

NZ cricket has a few talented players and yes the playing surface is a challenge for the tourists but going out on the field with a attitude of whoow these guys are dangerous is not helping the South African effort.

Yes, the Flap Caps choked but the Proteas played at 60% of their ability in this last T20. The bowling and fielding was erratic to say the least. We gave away 18 runs with wides and no-balls in comparison to only 3 estras given to us by the Flap Caps.

Yes we were lucky in this last T20 but where is that South African attitude and believe?

Make no mistake NZ have the ability to stunn us on their home paddock if we allow it. The operating term here ‘if we allow’ it.

We’ll allow it by getting ‘grootkop’ and totally under-estimating them or on the other extreme by being in an over-awed mindset of their supposed ability.

Snuff that kiwi believe that they can actually play cricket with attitude, agressiveness and by playing professional classy cricket and stop this current pussy-footing-around nonsense would my message to the Proteas.

  

New Zealand

R. Nicol c Levi b Morkel 33(19)
M. Guptill c Amla b Botha 26(19)
J. Ryder c Morkel b Botha 52(42)
B. McCullum c de Villiers b Peterson 18(19)
K. Williamson c Morkel b Morkel 6(9)
J. Franklin not out  9(8)
N. McCullum c de Villiers b de Lange 0(2)
D. Bracewell c Amla b de Lange 0(2)
T. Southee not out  0(1)
R. Hira   0
M. Bates   0
C. de Grandhomme   0

Extras (5lb, 1nb, 12w) 18
New Zealand 7/162
FOW 1/65, 2/73, 3/112, 4/142, 5/158, 6/160, 7/160
Over 20
RR 8.10

Bowling O M R W
R. Peterson 4 0 34 1
M. de Lange 4 0 36 2
A. Morkel 1 0 13 0
M. Morkel 4 0 31 2
J. Botha 4 0 20 2
W. Parnell 1 0 14 0
J. Duminy 2 0 9 0

South Africa

R. Levi c Nicol b Franklin 11(7)
H. Amla c McCullum b Bracewell 33(22)
A. Morkel c Nicol b Southee 10(9)
A. de Villiers b Nicol 29(23)
J. Duminy run out (Nicol)  38(20)
J. Ontong lbw b Nicol 6(5)
J. Botha c Guptill b Southee 2(7)
W. Parnell not out  22(17)
R. Peterson not out  11(10)
M. Morkel   0
M. de Lange   0
L. Tsotsobe   0

Extras (1lb, 2w) 3
South Africa 7/165

FOW 1/20, 2/39, 3/59, 4/121, 5/129, 6/130, 7/137
Over 20
RR 8.25

Bowling O M R W
R. Hira 2 0 20 0
M. Bates 3 0 29 0
J. Franklin 2 0 23 1
T. Southee 4 0 22 2
D. Bracewell 4 0 28 1
N. McCullum 2 0 22 0
R. Nicol 3 0 20 2

Not entirely convincing opener for Proteas

Posted on by
7

The Proteas started off with a hizz and a roar scoring 81 without losing a wicket before the spinners got into them. In the end they set Canterbury 151 to win in their first 20/20 match. The way the middle order fell flat against spin bowling was however a concern. The final total of 151 was probably about 15 to 20 runs short of what it should have been.

The Canterbury team were unable to take advantage from the situation and with Tsotsobe getting a hat trick and soon afterwards a fourth wicket putting his bowling figures on 4 for 9 the Canterbury side were in real trouble in the early parts of their innings.

Canterbury worked themselves back into the game and one started to worry that they might sneak a win. Brilliant fielding (with a few lapses) and some solid accurate bowling produced the results in the end for a good win.

Tsotsobe dismissed George Worker, Peter Fulton and Shanan Stewart in successive balls spread over two overs to leave the Wizards at 9-3 as they chased a target of 151.

From their perilous position, the new-look Canterbury side, with five players making their T20 debuts, did well to get to 130 before being bowled out at the end of the 19th over.

Matt Henry was the key member of a wagging tail, the 20-year-old belting 42 off 17 balls, including five sixes.

Tsotsobe finished with the fine figures of 4-18.

South Africa got to 150-6 after opener Richard Levi had given them a blazing start with 63 runs off just 32 balls.

Levi produced some impressive power hitting. He struck 13 boundaries, including three sixes.

It was the two Canterbury spinners Worker (3-23) and Tim Johnston (1-24) who applied the brakes.

In terms of the South African bowling attack Rusty Theron seemed to struggle a bit with slipping on delivery but where able to get a few wickets and maintain a reasonably good line and length. The other bowlers were the two Morkel brothers, Johan Botha, and Duminy and they went reasonably well. Morné getting a few wickets as well.

The pace attack lacked real zip (apart from Morné Morkel) and one got the impression the bowlers held back. They did maintain good line and length and bowled to the field. That and some good fielding created the necessary pressure which produced the wickets.

A good win but the black caps would have taken notice of the way we struggled against spin bowling.

Scoreboard from Twenty20 match between Canterbury and South Africa at Hagley Oval in Christchurch:

SOUTH AFRICA

R Levi b Worker 63
H Amla b Johnston 35
C Ingram c McEwan b Worker 2
AB de Villiers c Henry b Worker 4
JP Duminy c Latham b McEwan 24
J Ontong c McEwan b Henry 8
A Morkel not out 10
J Botha not out 3

 

Extras (0b, 0lb, 1wd, 0nb) 1

Total (for six wickets, 20 overs) 150

Fall of wickets: 81, 89, 98, 107, 120, 145

Bowling: M Henry 4-0-27-1, R McCone 2-0-20-0, L van Beek 1-0-21-0, M McEwan 4-0-30-1, G Worker 4-0-23-3 (1wd), T Johnston 4-0-24-1, H Nicholls 1-0-5-0.

CANTERBURY

G Worker c M Morkel b Tsotsobe 4
P Fulton b Tsotsobe 0
S Stewart lbw Tsotsobe 2
T Latham c de Villiers b Tsotsobe 11
R Young c Ingram b Theron 5
H Nicholls c Levi b Duminy 18
L van Beek c Theron b Botha 1
M McEwan c Tsotsobe b Theron 30
M Henry c de Villiers, b M Morkel 42
T Johnston run out (M Morkel) 0
R McCone not out 3

 

Extras: (4b, 5lb, 5wd, 0nb) 14

Total: (all out, 19 overs) 130

Fall of wickets: 6, 6, 9, 24, 28, 39, 63 122, 122, 130

Bowling: A Morkel 2-0-7-0, L Tsotsobe 4-0-18-4 (1wd), M Morkel 4-0-21-1 (2wd), J Botha 4-0-34-1 (1wd), J Theron 4-0-34-2 (1wd), JP Duminy 1-0-7-1. 

’56 Springbok tour – Wairarapa-Bush

Posted on by
Reply

August 2, 1956 – Solway Ground – Masterton 

South Arica 19 / Wairarapa-Bush 8

It was another disappointing Springbok performance and although they won by 11 points all the tries came from individual effort rather than from smooth team work as one would expect after 7 weeks and 15 matches on tour (excluding the 3 weeks and 6 matches in Australia).

Major part of the problem was injuries but there was also way too much reliance on the backline to make things happen. The injury problems affected both the forwards and back line with Piet du Toit a prop having to play in the loose trio as No8 and with Rosenberg coming back after long injury into the backline. Viviers was also forced to play with injury when Buchler pulled his thigh muscle so badly in training the day before the match that he was not able to play again on tour. The backs were arguably more disrupted/affected with players having to play out of position and/or on return to soon to match situations after injury especially since the team were relying heavily on them to make magic against a flat lying defence. The overall impression was one of mediocrity. Continue reading →

Legends versus Greats

Posted on by
28

My previous post about Springbok legends apply. That list as indicated was based on a list called 20 all Black Greats published in the New Zealand Herald. The New Zealand Herald’s main criterion was that it should be players that were world beaters and who dominated their eras on the larger world stage as players.

Now being captain of a team –all be it a very successful team- does not make you a world beater as a player.

There is in my opinion a difference between being a legend and a great. A player can be considered a great if he played more than 70 tests for his country. Certainly if he played more than 100 and from that perspective John Smit, Matfield and Percy Montgomery should be called Springbok greats as should players like John Gainsford, Frik du Preez and Jan Ellis who played respectively 33and 38 tests in the non-professional era.

John Smit is also the most capped Springbok captain and from that angle I might agree that he is one of the greats of Springbok rugby.

My list however is called Springbok legends because I don’t think a legend and a great is the same thing. A legend is somebody that lives in the ‘volksmond’. It is a talked about player due to his extraordinary exploits, characteristics or playing style. It is somebody that captured our imagination and/or who changed the way we play/see the game and/or who changed the outcome of a series with some outstanding ability/feat.

Frik du Preez was a legend and a great. Joggie Jansen became a legend due to a couple of tackles during the 1970 All Black series but he was never a world beater.

So if I were to construct a list of 20 Springbok greats my list will look at things like amount of matches played, amount of tries scored and whether the person was a world beater.

My list of 20 Springbok greats will look as follows:

  1. John Smit – for being the most capped Springbok captain
  2. Percy Montgomery – for being the first player who played 100 test matches for South Africa and for his world class accurate two-step place kicking; being the springbok that scored the most points for his country.
  3. Victor Matfield – for never losing a line-out contest in 110 test matches
  4. Bryan Habana – for having scored the most tries as a springbok
  5. Danie Craven – for his contributions on and off the field
  6. Hennie Muller – for being the most successful Springbok captain ever and for the way he redefined No8 play
  7. Morné du Plessis – for his leadership and success rate as a Springbok captain (86%).
  8. Chester Williams – for impressing everyone with his ability and decision making
  9. Ray Mordt – for being the first Springbok that scored three tries in one test against the All Blacks
  10. Frik du Preez – for being the SA rugby player of the century
  11. Danie Gerber – for being arguably the best center that ever played the game
  12. Naas Botha – for his ability to win test matches
  13. Joost van der Westhuizen – for his work ethic on the field and his ability to score impossible tries
  14. Bennie Osler – for dominating SA rugby and world rugby from the flyhalf position for longer than a decade.
  15. John Gainsford – for his competitiveness and longevity as a top class player
  16. Jan Ellis – for showing that you can be a world beater even if you play for SWA and longevity as top class performer
  17. Os du Randt – two RWC gold medals; and for coming back after serious injury to settle our scrum problems
  18. Ruben Kruger – for never taking a backward step
  19. Gerry Brand – a legend among legends according to Danie Craven
  20. Boy Louw – Danie Craven: “I don’t believe that South Africa will ever see the likes of Boy Louw again”.

I need more places for players like Phil Mostert, Philip Nel, Henry Honiball, André Venter, Rob Louw, Daan Retief, Johan Claassen, Uli Schmidt, Gerrie Germishuys, Gysie Pienaar and Carel du Plessis. So I am starting to wonder. Should I keep John Smit in just because he was the most capped Springbok captain?

20 Springbok legends

Posted on by
35

New Zealand Herald recently published their list of 20 All Black greats. See here.

 

These are the players that made All Black rugby what it is or who changed the direction or perception on how the game should be played in New Zealand. Who are the Springbok legends that formed SA rugby; who made Springbok rugby what it is?

 

Here is my list of 20 Springbok greats/legends. I do think they stack up well against the All Black greats.

 

  1. Danie Craven – Mr South African rugby
  2. Os du Randt – Two RWC gold medals; Coincidence?
  3. Mof Myburg – When all else fails bring Mof into the pack
  4. Frik du Preez – Our drop, place and score man or just say Chris Laidlaw
  5. Mannetjies Roux – genius is as genius does
  6. Naas Botha – Look at the scoreboard
  7. Danie Gerber – Maestro of the midfield
  8. Bennie Osler – Created a Springbok playing style
  9. Victor Matfield – 110 test caps later and never lost a line-out contest
  10. Jan Ellis – Fire and brimstone stuff
  11. Joost van der Westhuizen – try scoring machine
  12. Joggie Jansen – who will ever forget that tackle that turned a series
  13. Gysie Pienaar – Sparked a series to life; just say 1980 Lions
  14. Ray Mordt – Jonu who?
  15. Japie Krige – Just find me a wing who could stay with him
  16. HO de Villiers – for changing the way we saw fullback play
  17. Rob Louw –Mouth-watering midfield linking wing forward
  18. Hennie Muller – for redefining No8 play
  19. John Gainsford – A man’s man
  20. Henry Honiball – for showing that the Springboks can win matches without a flyhalf sitting in the pocket

 

As I went along constructing this list I realised that ‘greats’ and ‘legends’ are probably not the exact same thing.

 

Specifically the criteria to qualify for a ‘great’ would probably be slightly different from those for a ‘legend’. Some-one who made a significant impact in one test or a series like Joggie Jansen could be seen as a legend but not necessarily as a great. On the other hand some-one like André Venter who never had a real outstanding legendary moment but who was a stalwart over decades making outstanding contributions to team effort/accomplishments could qualify as a ‘great’ but probably not a ‘legend’.

 

The New Zealand Herald’s criteria were players who were world-beaters and who dominated their eras. From that perspective players like Daan Retief, Bobby Skinstad, André Venter, André Joubert, Micheal and Carel du Plessis, Louis Moolman, Piet Greyling and maybe Morné du Plessis could probably also be on a list like this. 

 

With only 20 spots looking at players who I would class as legends; who are remembered for their impact on Springbok rugby and world rugby this would be my list.