Mallet stays firmly in the mix

Ex Sport 24

Houwing’s ‘Tops on the Telly’ column

I reckon Nick Mallett is as close as anyone in rugby worldwide to being a wholly authentic TV critic. Heart on sleeve, no punches pulled ... you could rack up the complimentary clichés but they are all valid.

So it probably comes as firm reassurance to many that the Test series between the Springboks and England being over doesn’t mean the former national coach and player takes a breather or even disappears completely off SuperSport’s screens.

He is on a contract with the corporation and although I do not know its duration this presumably means that as long as no major coaching/directorship type of role comes his way in the interim, he will remain a regular presence on the punditry landscape as the marathon season steams on. (Excellent t ohave him on board)

SuperSport communications boss Clinton van der Berg confirmed to me this week that Cape Town-based Mallett will be in studio on Saturday once more for both domestic Super Rugby derbies (Stormers v Lions and Bulls v Cheetahs).

The hierarchy there are well aware of the overwhelmingly kind public sentiment his engagement is generating, and it is known that he enjoys this burgeoning new string to his bow as well.

Mallett was at vintage “blunt” during the final Test in Port Elizabeth last Saturday, as the Boks ran up consistent blind alleys for the first time in the series, England’s counter-physicality severely thwarting their momentum.

He was among the first critics to lament their glaring lack of a “Plan B” - even as coach Heyneke Meyer later suggested, perhaps a little dubiously, that “proper execution of Plan A” would have prevented a need for any different approach.

Mallett has also judged Meyer (who came under his influence as he cut his teeth in the Cape as a young coach, remember) entirely fairly in his first few weeks in charge, not shy to point out the former Bulls mastermind’s strong points which often enough came to the fore in the Durban and Johannesburg matches.

A personal sixpence on the subject is that the Boks partly lost their lustre at Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium because several of them were effectively playing a fourth “Test” in as many weeks, considering the typical intensity of the Bulls-Stormers derby just a week before the series began.
 

Mallet was excellent after the third test.At last someone who could pinpoint the real ssues and never came out with a series old cliches and nonsense. He understands the game  and is far, far better than what we are accustomed to hearing.  He also speaks well besides being very knowledgeable. Long may it last!!

 oh Yes i fully agree. Nick has been a real breath of fresh air there. Hopefully he stays for a while, or decides that he likes it way more than coaching overseas. Why don't he coach some school side or something to keep himself busy so I can be selfish and be able to listen to his opinions on supersport for a long time still.

Like him more than the others on offer.  Comes over as very passionate about rugby.

 Both my wife and my girlfriend think he is a dead ringer for George Clooney!

so much man love here - must be the wrong site!

if the Boks believe that "they were playing their 4th test" nonsense, then they are going to get creamed come the 4nations. they simply need to understand that the team named in the 3rd test, was not good enough to win, it was only good enough not to lose.

there was many reasons for the Boks inability to win the 3rd test, mornes poor game, loss of key players, poor coaching tactics like not bringing on subs at crucial moments, meyers unhealthy obssesion with obsolete players of little value like olivier and spies and meyers shocking no plan B as mallet pointed out. but i dont believe this 4th test nonsense, thats aother poor excuse to be added on top of the pile of many other reasons for the Boks shortcomings.
 

Sasu

I watched the program.  Nick Mallett is obviously a better critic than he was as a coach.   It is easy to criticize - diffiicult to implement.   However, I have in genneral no problem with criticism and do believe that his criticism of the poor eprfromances of some players and even the coach was justified.

I do believe that Meyer has a problem imnasmuch as his adherence to certain players under-perform constantly is concerned - but he had to contend with injuries to key players like Vermeulen, Alberts and Burger.   He also had no option - but to play Olivier insttead of Francois Steyn due to him getting married on the day of the test.    However, I must also admit that Meyer criticized the performance of Morne Steyn and some other players so what Mallett said about them was nothing new.

What is to my mind detrimental is the fact that Meyer seemingly believes in some players as a key components of his game plan - whilst those players are either under-performing detrimentally affecting his game plan.    In this regard the issue of Morne Steyn is a key - with lesser attention being paid to Hougaard and Spies.   Unless he makes different choices of more form players - SA has no chance in the 4Nations.  I must admit that Meyer apparently thinks along the line of playing a 10 man game - which worked for the Bulls when they won the Super 14 -  without affective usage of the back line in attacking play.   I do admit I do not sunscribe to that kind of strategy - and also think that Marshall's observations, as well as Mallettt's views on that issue is justified.