Down Memory Lane - the 2007 WC

DSTV is in memory of the 2007 WC a decade later is running the SA games in 2007 and got Dan Retief to comment on the games in question.
I am not going to go into detail insofar as the individual games is concerned and am just going to look at the various aspects of the world cup series that year - since memories have in some respects being dulled by what is written on this site.
Lucky Breaks
The Springboks never played New Zealand and Australia in that series and the only top rated team they played against twice was England - by that time in serious decline after their 2003 WC win.
Positive
The appointment of Eddie Jones as backline consultant resulted in the team in general tended to play 15 man rugby - until the wheels nearly came off in the final against England
Negatives
This really came to the fore in the final when the England team was allowed to dictate  the format of the game to be played and as a result they came extremely near to scoring the only try in the game - while the Springboks never really showed anything in attack.   This showed that Jake White really had a problem - it should never have been allowed to happen.
The defense of some players were showed up in the final with Francois Steyn being really poor in the final.   This deficiency of Steyn got worse later in his career and when he lost his attacking flair later on he became a liability in tests and even on Super Rugby level.
In retrospect it is nice to repeat the positive of winning the World Cup and ignore the negatives.   One of those is the romantic version that Jake White had no deficiencies as a coach.    The Springboks had problems in the final after wiping the floor with England in the round robin match because of a coaching problem allowing England to determine the nature of the game to be played in the final.
This problem came through in White's later career as a coach - he can take a team through to the semi's or even the final - but his teams were always beaten at that stage of competitions - and in some cases beaten badly.   That raise the question as to why White's coaching career has had its up and downs and why he terminated his contract with the Brumbies and was effectively fired by the Sharks and Montpellier..       



 

Correct me if I'm wrong, I think I read somewhere that the weak England side that we hammered 36-0 in the group stages (and then only squeaked past in the final) was the one and only team we played in that tournament that had ever beaten us before. None of the other teams we beat along the way had ever beaten us in their entire history up to that point.

Now that is what I call a lucky draw!

Like all other South Africans, I was very happy to win that RWC but I can admit that was a freak result and we had a very overrated coach and team.

 I do not think you are in all respects correct here.   I think although there were some England team changes after the 36-0 loss - the major change being the fact that the English changed there game plan and decided to play 10man rugby trying to dominate up front.   White allowed that to happen and he effectively neutralized the previous more comprehensive game plan used earlier in the tournament.
There were weak links in the team and I would say those included Francois Steyn and even butch James -  but it was a strong enough team to hide the weak links effectively.    

Ou Maaik, the part of my post that was under correction is the bit about whether or not any of the other teams we played (besides England) had ever beaten us in their entire history.

Other than England, we played Samoa, Tonga and USA in the pool stages and then we played Fiji in the Quarters and Argentina in the Semis. Don't think we'd lost a test to any of those countries as at 2007, had we?

 wo muppets turning victory into defeat.AND all because their theory that Jake coudn't coach has crashed and burned.  Where has Jake not made a success of his coaching role. Nowhere oaks nowhere. He even succeeded at the hapless guppies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Beeno unmasking the inner wellsprings of motivation!

 Bweeno
I listened to what Dab Retief said about the final - and the conclusion is clear White was not prepared to play the game the Springboks that they played earlier in the tournament and allowed England to dictate the game - which is a very real deficiency on the part of White - whether you like it or not.
The coaching approach of White has one obvious and  very limited results.   It normally become unstuck in the final stages of tournaments.   White in the end failed iin the case of both the cases of the Brumbies and Sharks abd he has the distinction of being fired by both the Sharks and Montpellier.   That shows what real rugby experts thinks ofhim as a coach.
We have on consolation - despite the negatives mentioned above the Springboks beat an over-the-hill team in the 2007 final.   And since the departure of White as a coach we went back steadily in the coaching department from having a limited coach to a category best described as loudmouth poor, ignorantly poor and totally inept poor.   Amongst that rogues gallery White comes across as a shining light.  

Ah yes....the same team won the 2004 and 2009 Trinations.....but we were lucky to win the 2007 WC. The logic being we never played the teams that were beaten by the teams we played. Jake white haters, still bitter after 10 years.

England beat Australia. England also beat France, who knocked out NZ. Those are two big scalps. England was no pushover, despite the first round drubbing. They knuckled down and did what they had to.
Neither of the sides we were supposed to be measured against for the win to have substance even made the semis. Aus and NZ both folded under the pressure. The Boks didn't. 
Yeah, it was an easy pool, but NZ also had an easy pool with Scotland, Italy, Romania and Portugal. We also didn't ask for Wales to get knocked out so that we ended up with Fiji in the quarters. We didn't ask for Australia to get stuck against England. We didn't ask for NZ to go down against the French. You can only play what's in front of you.

Well we thrashed Wales 34 to 12 a week later and had a winning record over Oz during Jake’s tenure. As for the ABs we have done well against them in WC settings and the remnants of our great 2007 team played a much superior NZ to within 2 points 8 years later. .. This is truly a shameful thread.....advanced by bitter never enders. You would never find NZ fans so anti their own team. This has nothing to do with objectivity and everything to do with petty provincial jealousy.

 The whole discussion has been totally misconstrued again.   Fact is we did not end up[ playing any of the top teams and in the England round riobin game winning 36-0 the fact is that we won the game 36-0.
In the final the team playe3d and allowed the English team to dictate the format and style of the game played and the Springboks response was barely survival and reverting to the 10man game dictate4d by the English.   Can there be no questions asked about why that happened?
This is not an issue about Jake White haters - it is an issue that was shown in that game and in other teams coached by White when it came to later stages of the tournaments teams coached by him occurred.        

Actually that was a typical WC final.....the biggest difference between the two sides was the Boks won all of their lineouts whereas England lost 7 of theirs.....courtesy of WC MOM Victor Matfield.

 and in the England round riobin game winning 36-0 the fact is that we won the game 36-0
Yes, not under dispute. But...so what? England then went on to win all their remaining matches, including playoff wins over Australia and All Blacks slayers France. 
If the 36-0 reference is to indicate that England was a useless side, their wins over Australia and France clearly show that they were anything but useless, and that in fact they knew exactly how to engage in the type of trench warfare that sudden death contests often turn into, and how to grind out a win against the odds. They were dangerous final opponents.

NZ and Aus, in 2007, were not good enough to even reach the semi-finals. SA and England were better.

 No - it is not typical of a WC final.   The finals in all of 1999 , 2003 and  2015 allowed for comprehensive game performances - not the type of game the English team dictated to be played in the 2007 final.   
Anybody who came up with the BS about the NZ and Aussie teams in 2007 are talking crap as per normal with brain-deficient dunces.
However, the thread is interesting - it entails an evaluation of what happened in 2007 as is seen by Dan Retief and quite a large number of other observers.   I think it punch some holes in the views of some  of our members insofar as Jake White is concerned.
The question however remains - why was he actually fired by the Sharks and Montpellier if he is indeed above criticism?    

There was no RWC final in 2000.

 In 87, NZ was lucky SA did not participate.  In 95, SA was lucky we beat the Frogs.  In 99, SA was unlucky to lose to Aus...Larkam's only test drop goal the difference in extra time in the semifinals.  In 2003, SA was crap, but England was lucky that them pesky Aussies took NZ out. 2007, everyone except England and SA imploded. 2011 Brycie had a brainfart...as did the idiot blowing the final. Not to mention Warburton blowing Wales' best chance ever with a stupid red. 2015...close between NZ and SA again..NZ edged it home. Barring 2003, SA actually performed well in all the world cups they played in.

@DA. OU Maaikie Is privileged to seeing games that others always miss. The 2010 SR final between the Bulls and the Sharks and the 2000 RWC final being two prime examples.