Matfield: Springboks will win 2015 World Cup

Matfield: Springboks will win 2015 World Cup

Returning Springboks lock Victor Matfield believes the South Africans will win next year's World Cup in England.

Matfield, who retired after the Springboks 2011 World Cup exit at the hands of Australia, in New Zealand, has returned to play for the Bulls in Super Rugby this year.

He wants to regain the Springbok No.5 jersey and is looking to take part in the World Cup.

"I have played in three World Cups and won one," he told the Rapport newspaper.

"In my view, the current Bok team is the best one ever and will take the trophy next year.

"I want to be part of that team. It would be absolutely fantastic to finally walk away from the game in such a triumphant manner and then turn my focus to coaching," he said.

Matfield, 36, said he wants to coach the Springboks in the future with his friend halfback Fourie du Preez. They were both working towards that goal, he said.

"But for now I have to make sure I make the Bulls team. That's the first challenge. After that we'll see if the rest of my plans fall in place. No-one gave me any guarantees," he said.

Meanwhile, the Bulls will be without the services of loose forward Arno Botha for six months after he suffered a knee injury in the warm-up game against the Stormers on Saturday.

He damaged the ACL and it will require surgical correction.

Bulls coach Frans Ludeke said: "Arno was pivotal for our Super Rugby campaign during 2014. He was very influential in his time on the field against the Stormers before his injury and it was great to see him return to his best form after his previous injury."

dream on matfiled, Boks have got bigger things on their plate, like will they ever beat the All Blacks again???

IMO, yes.
but i got a good feeling that the Boks are going down the same path as the wallabies.
All Blacks will lose one every now and then (maybe once every four years), otherwise its pretty much 100% All Black domination.

the idea of matfield and du preez as future Bok coaches is one with a lot of merit, they are probably two of the smartest players to come from SA and play in the modern era.

and arno botha, what a huge loss for the bulls, i had arno in both my test rugby and foxsport teams.

If Matfield had played instead of Juandre Kruger in 2013 the Boks would have won the 4 Nations. A fit Andries Bekker would also have made the difference- who will probably be making a return for the 2015 World Cup.
The lineouts and kick offs would have been much better- the weakest the have been for a bok team ever since watching the game. 
I am not sure what Matfield will be like when he plays- but I expect he will still be the best lineout forward in the world- and useful at kick offs. A fit Andries Bekker would offer more all round the park, and Steph DuToit may have enough experience to be starting at 5.
The Boks put in the most commanding performances on 2013- ask Australia and Argentina who lost by record scores. 
Then ask the Northern Hemishphere who was the hardest team. The All Black forwards were bullied on the 2103 EOY tour, where at times it was downright embarrassing for the Southern Hemishpere.
 It was only in the last 15 minutes the all Blacks backs were able to rescue the game with the extra space that opens up towards the end of the match. 

 Not with the Golden Oldies in the team- they won't.   Mattfield and co had their chance  in 2011 and fluffed it - why should they be any better in 2015?  

@sharkbok

"If Matfield had played instead of Juandre Kruger in 2013 the Boks would have won the 4 Nations."
if saffas could play rugby the way they make excuses, the Boks would have a 100% season in 2014.
if only, what if and it was the r efs fault, the national anthem of the modern day Bok fan when ever they talk about the mighty mighty All Blacks.

A fit Andries Bekker would also have made the difference- who will probably be making a return for the 2015 World Cup."
funny, cos bekker did sweet F all  in the 2012 RC/4nats.
oh wait a minute, i do remember bekker getting lineoutballs stoled by whitelock, so i should really say he did sweet F all for the Boks.

"The Boks put in the most commanding performances on 2013- ask Australia and Argentina who lost by record scores."
didnt the Boks only win 22-17 against the pumas in mendoza??? and were out scored try wise???

anyway, i can remember both leguizamon and multiple members of the wallabies team all giving credit to the All Blacks saying they are the hardest team in the world to beat.

BTW how many games did the All Blacks lose in 2013??? give u a clue, they are the only team in the world to have achieved that feat in the pro era.

"Then ask the Northern Hemishphere who was the hardest team. The All Black forwards were bullied on the 2103 EOY tour, where at times it was downright embarrassing for the Southern Hemishpere."
winning all ur tests including a humdinger against ireland is embarrassing???

thinking that performances of other teams elsewhere compared to performances of ur team somewhere else, is indicative of who is the hardest team.

u dont ever have to ask ireland or scotland who they think is the hardest team, the big 0% beside their win column vs ther All Blacks makes that a no brainer.

All Blacks winning percentage
overall - 76%
home - 82%
away - 70%
NH - 83%

Boks winning percentage
overall - 63%
home - 68%
away - 57.7
NH - 72%

numbers dont lie, All Blacks are the hardest team in the world to beat.

by ur rationale, All Blacks just won against ireland, while we convincingly beat the Boks, so does that mean ireland is better then the Boks???
england are the only team to put a loss in hansens win column, i guess that makes england better then the Boks too???
or is that definition more than a tad bit stupid, like ur what if dreamland post,


cant wait to hear the crackpot theories which a guaranteed to surface after the Boks lose another two tests to the All Blacks.
i suspect it will be something along the lines of it was cos chester williams wasnt playing,
LMAO,

 Why is it with  your posts Sharkbok that there's always an "if only"??

 Fair and balanced, Missy Cloudy. Well said.

 There is Sasuke trying to be smart again but I guess we can use any stats really.
Aussies put 6 tries on the Ab's in 3 games in 2013. They put 1 try on the Boks that was really, like the French try against us, some tin arse luck the Boks could not prevent as opposed to well worked tries. Now Sas, I will spell that out for you. That means Aussies scored an average of 2 tries per game against the AB's and 0.5 a game agaisnt the Boks. Who is "easier" to beat?
Difference is, the AB's get to play the Aussies when they were disjointed and had no clue. We had to play the Argies when they are fired up on passion and showing no signs of fatigue as yet. AB's play them when they have been away from home for 3 weeks and its the back end of the comp when they are tired and injured. 
AB's looked shit in the NH and could have easily lost all 3 games if those NH teams had some belief. Not one of those teams could put a proper try against the Boks. NZL had 5 scored against them, SA had 1. Both played 3 games..Must I do the maths for you again Sas. 
Boks played the AB's in another farce that is becoming the norm with any test match involving the Boks in NZL. We had to play 50mins without 2 of our biggest weapons. Alberts and Bizzy..Imagine the AB's losing 2 of their best carriers. Read and retallick. Tickets for them. SA we put the 4 tries on the AB's then forgot to defend. Let some easy tries in there. Who knows how many Habana was gona get on the day in the mood he was in...
All in all, a very lucky year for NZL..A few lucky moments..Aussies looked better than the Ab's both games in NZL and the Wellington game was a piss poor ref showing from that incompetent Jaco Peyper...
2014 is here and we shall see how that pans out but you can copy these words now and play them back to me at the end of 2015..NZL will not win the WC in the NH in 2015..Not a chance in hell. They could hardly beat a NH team for the cup in NZL...
Start planning your excuses now like Suzie or Wayne Barnes or tummy bugs because you cock suckers are gona need it!

Bwhaaaahaaaaaaa CHICKEN is trying his hand at rugby talk.......frame it!!!!!!  

Bwhaaaahaaaaaaa CHICKEN is trying his hand at rugby talk.......frame it!!!!!!  

 Very true, and I predicted ahead of time that we would most often be the ones to face the Argies fresh. They lack fitness for a long campaign, so those first two to three tests are by far the toughest. In everything else you say Boklogic I agree, but for one thing; Australia were never in the running to beat either New Zealand or South Africa. They were blown away in their worst ever season against the Boks or All Blacks, simply toasted in all four games!

The Ellis Park test saw very soft tries gifted to New Zealand, it was the most tactically naive showing, mostly due to the hunt for the bonus point. In New Zealand the Boks had the All Blacks on the ropes until Bismarck got carded, it was the same in 2012, they were completely dominated at the breakdown and set pieces.

 Yes Dave..We talking rugby..I didnt expect you to get it.I will come down to your level though and we can converse but not for long as it hurts my brain. Here we go, lets start:
Dave, I really like your idea of leaving JDV out of the Bok team and especially playing Volmink over Habana. Perhaps you are right. Mnisi is the way forward at 12. Morne has been shocking. You are on the money there and I like your idea of switching him up for Jantjies..How is ol CJ Stander going these days anyway??When we last spoke, you said we could mark your words that your "friend" (who left England without saying goodbye coz thats what friends do) who has gone to coach the Griquas will be with the Cheetahs soon and he is bringing you over as his lead advisor and squad selector. How are those plans coming on ol sport? Why did he not say goodbye?? Is he another in the long list of blokes who think you are a cunt?Please, do go on to tell us how Jake, Meyer, Coetzee and Plumtree are all getting it wrong but you have it all worked out. Are you still battling with that condition where you think of only rugby and women? I think that disease is known as "weirdofuckilitis"..

 Sun-Tzu, I disagree re. Aussies not being in the hunt to beat the AB's..On 3 occasions the AB's blatantly and professionally cheated to prevent Aussie tries. Not even a card for them..The Dunedin game could have gone either way too.
Boks haven't beat NZL as we have not been as settled as we are now.. AB's have had the same core players for many years now..2014 we will waste them 2-0 at a canter..Please frame this!

 Sasuke, we beat England 3 times in 2012, once in the EOYT (I think it was after AB loss). Does that make the Boks better than the AB's? 
That sort of logic is childish and I can tell you were using it to cause some shit. Typical. 

@shazzzzzzzza,

" Sasuke, we beat England 3 times in 2012, once in the EOYT (I think it was after AB loss). Does that make the Boks better than the AB's?"
please understand the context before u and that convicted drug cheat of an avatar once again show how humans have contracted the foot in mouth disease.

sharkboks post was implying that the Boks are a more feared team than the All Blacks cos of how the Boks fared on the EOYT compared to the All Blacks performances, despite the fact the french was the only team they played.

i then said,,,
"by ur rationale, All Blacks just won against ireland, while we convincingly beat the Boks, so does that mean ireland is better then the Boks???"
the key words here is by ur rationale, meaning by what sharkbok said, i can imply the exact same thing using the irish and english examples, kapish???
prob not, seeing as how u didnt get it the first time round,

"That sort of logic is childish and I can tell you were using it to cause some shit."
does that mean im off ur christmas card list????

FINE, than ur off my christmas card list,

"Typical."
typical like an All Blacks win over the Boks???

@sun one,

"Very true, and I predicted ahead of time that we would most often be the ones to face the Argies fresh. They lack fitness for a long campaign, so those first two to three tests are by far the toughest."
really, the pumas are at their best in their first two tests despite the next to zero game time the players have before the RC/4nats???
nearly all of their players come from the NH comps and for the last two years the following comps finished on, (note the dates the game of the grand finals, meaning some teams had been finished for even longer,,,

rabo direct pro 12 - (27/05/2012) (25/05/2013)
top 14 - (09/06/2012) (01/06/2013)
aviva premiership - (26/05/2012) (25/05/2013)
heinken cup - (19/05/12) (18/05/2013)

and how many puma tests were played before the RC/4nats???
3 in 2012 with the last being played on the 23rd of june and 3 in 2013 with the last being played om the 22nd of june.

how many games were played after that by the pumas and their players???
in 2013 the pumas played the NSW barbarians on august 3rd and august the 6th.

fastforward to the 2013 RC/4nats on the 18/08/2013 and what does it all add up to????
it adds up to the Boks playing a pumas outfit who are a team who have always struggled to live up to their tier one status, played two games against a NSW baabaas team 9 days ago, and again 6 days before that, and before that against georgia on the the 22nd of june a moth and half a go.

and ur trying to claim the pumas are hardest in their first two games, what a F-ing joke.
theres a reason why the pumas always give the Boks grief in test two where they outplayed the Boks both times in mendoza, its cos the pumas first RC/4nats test is where they get a real warm up to polish their edge on a nice peice of rugby stone like the 2nd placed Boks.
once theyre warmed up, they always threaten, the Boks know this fact very well indeed, u need only look at the so embarrassing if i was a Bok fan i would throw myself of a byuilding 2012 draw against them.

pfffffffft.

"In New Zealand the Boks had the All Blacks on the ropes until Bismarck got carded,"
so in 2013 the All Blacks were on the ropes from the Boks in NZ???
despite the fact the All Blacks were leading 17-10 when bizzy was red carded,,,
at eden park where the All Blacks have a 100% record in the professional era,,,
a ground where the Boks havent won since 1936,,,
in a country where the Boks have only won 3 times in the professional era,,,

and NZ was on the ropes??? yeah right, pass us a tuis aye.
and u prob wont get the tuis reference, but thats clearly not going to be the first or last time u wont get something.

"it was the same in 2012, they were completely dominated at the breakdown and set pieces."
2012 dunedin All Blacks vs Boks

Rucks won
All Blacks - 61 from 68 (89.7%)
Boks 60 from 64 (93.8%)

Mauls won
All Blacks - 0 from 1 (0.0%)
Boks - 9 from 9 (100.0%)

Scrums on own feed
All Blacks - 6 won, 0 lost (100.0%)
Boks - 4 won, 2 lost (66.7%)

Lineouts on own throw
All Blacks - 12 won, 1 lost (92.3%)        
Boks - 13 won, 5 lost (72.2%)

if u dont know what dominated means, than dont use it, theres no shame in not knowing, but plenty when used so incorrectly the way u did.

stick to more simple and smaller words for now like owned, which u gave just been, :o)

 "so in 2013 the All Blacks were on the ropes from the Boks in NZ???
despite the fact the All Blacks were leading 17-10 when bizzy was red carded,,,"

You have conveniently forgotten that the Boks were already wrongfully robbed of a 15th player for 10 minutes by the time Bismarck got red-carded. In addition, because he is a front-rower, they lost Alberts as well because they had to take another player off to bring on Strauss in Bismarck's place. That was why they were leading by 17-10. I know that you will now come back with your own little theory/speculation that the Boks would have lost in any case but that remains just that. Speculation.

@Sasuke- can you say that in "2013" EOYT the Boks did not put in a more dominant performance than the All Blacks.
The Boks played 2 out the top 3 teams n the NH, namely Wales (number1) and France (number2). 
Scotland are crap but Ireland have not exactly much better, and it may be for a long time until they are good again.
Bottom line is that the boks conceded one try and the All Blacks 5. The All Blacks were pushed in their games and the Boks allways looked like they had another gear. 
I was talking about "2013" EOYT, on current form. With the world cup in 2015 it would be pretty easy to consider the Boks as favourites, although to be objective this has to be decided by the Northern Hemishpere sides

 Ahh the old team A beat team team B by more points than team C beat team D so team A is better than team C despite being dusted by team C home and away in 2012 and 2013 argument ...seems legit

Poi-e, Sharktwat (aka SharkBok) is a fool. There's no other word to describe him. Please don't consider his views to be representative of the average SA rugby fan. 
Just as an example, Sharktwat professes to be a Sharks supporter but he shamlessly supported the Stormers in the years when his fantasy sex partners Percy Montgomery and Barbie Skinstad played for them . . . and then he switched back to being a Sharks "supporter". That's the kind of person he is. I'm not even joking . . . ask him yourself.

@ceradyne,

"You have conveniently forgotten that the Boks were already wrongfully robbed of a 15th player for 10 minutes by the time Bismarck got red-carded.
getting tired, and when sun one said that bizzy getting carded changed everything, i jumped straight away too the red.

regarding the yellow.
as bull shit as that yellow was, there was only 7 points scored as a result meaning the score would have been 10 all at halftime.

but answer me this, why is the Boks were only able score once they got the one man advantage???
it wouldnt be unreasonable to say, that the Boks would never have taken the lead, as they never once had it in the enitre game.

 In addition, because he is a front-rower, they lost Alberts as well because they had to take another player off to bring on Strauss in Bismarck's place."
so they didnt lose alberts, he was replaced.

"That was why they were leading by 17-10."
no they were leading 17-10 cos brodieratllick scored a try which in rugby is worth 5points, but when converted like barret did, its worth 7.
as the All Blacks were on 10pts before jaws scored a try which was converted by barret, "That was why they were leading by 17-10."

"I know that you will now come back with your own little theory/speculation that the Boks would have lost in any case but that remains just that. Speculation."
oh u mean like evry little implication here by the saffas implying it could have been all different if not for bizzys card???
that speculation???
pfffffffffffffft, Bok fans inability to handle losing the All blacks is nothing but icing on our amazing All Black cake which u cant have none off, :oP

 Attention Illogic! You stated the following:

 

6/02/14 at 12:30:12...."2014 is here and we shall see how that pans out."

 

6/02/14 at 12:51:22...."2014 we will waste them 2-0 at a canter....Please frame this!"

 

So Logic, what happened in the 21 minutes and 10 seconds between those comments?

Why the sudden surge of bravado? Is it because your right hand was firmly gripped around your member??

I really sympathise with Saffex having to attempt any form of rational discussion with a twerp such as yourself!

Cue Logic now to come back with lots of four letter words....

 

 Boklogic, your take on Dave Saffex is just brilliant. Did he really say he was going to be  lead advisor and squad selector for the Cheethas ? 

Rooiarse, since when have you been classified as an average SA rugby fan- or even an average member of the human race? 
Surely if ever you have achieved the status of average- it is only as the lonely turd floating around in a toilet hoping not to be flushed away....  
You are however correct in one thing though, I don't represent you. 
Rooiarse have you been hanging around the Sharks changing room toilets lately?

Matfield of course is absolutely right and is just telling the world what we Bok fans already know.

I'm afraid Matfield, the greatest lock in the modern era in my not unbiased view, was already declining  by RWC11. I wouldn't count him out, but it has to be a long shot. That said Victor is close enough to HM for this return to almost certainly have HM's blessing.

Matfield was playing better in 2008-2010, although apparently he was carrying allot of injuries towards the end of his career and it may not have just been age that was slowing him down. Lineouts are a keypart of the South African game to start rolling mauls- and the lineouts were supper crap in 2013, and not great in 2012 either.

 what's the rush boys? We're still enjoying our cup 

 Rugganut, I shit you not my bru..He reckons his mate (the guys surname is Engledow) has been given the job of coaching Griquas in the Vodacom cup which is true but then he goes on to say it wont be long until he is coach of the Cheetahs and he has already told Dave that he will bring him on as an assistant. Dave reckons Engledow knows exactly what he is worth as a coach and thats why he wants him.Dave still used phrases like "mark my words" and "watch this space!"
We then found out that Engledow left England without even saying goodbye to Dave. Dave said they were really good friends too. Now let me ask you this Rugganut..If you had a "good friend" that promised you when he hits the big time, you are his assistant, would he not tell you he has been given a great opportunity and is returning home? Dave said he was over for a braai and still didnt mention anything and then he was just gone..On a flight back home and Dave found out via the news..Really good friend that is ;-)
Moolaa, really great post..No bearing on anything as usual but 10 points for effort. Why are you only back on the net now?? WINZ finally pay your internet bill? What have you been doing whilst its been down?? Sitting with your hand on your member.. ha ha ha ha lets laugh all day.
Fucken idiot!

 @Sasuke, first of all, I can say with 100% confidence that I have never ever said that SA would have won that game, had Poite not made that mistake. I have not even tried to imply that, and I never will. What I am saying is that we will never know what would have happened. To say that SA would have won is just as much speculation as you saying that NZ would have won. That is all I am prepared to add to what I have said. Everything else is pure speculation. Having said that, you cannot for one moment deny that Bismarck's first yellow card has changed the entire dynamics of that game. It handed NZ the initiative at a crucial time.

 The Boks's had the Kiwi pack on the ropes, we were highly dominant at the breakdown and scrum time. To say that would have been of no significance is just ignorance. The Bok dominance was not speculative, but very real. That card, at that time, was fatal.

 @ceradyne,
You, the bok supporters, are the only ones who begin with the speculations and live in "Ifland". We all know what happened and that is:
- The AB won the 2 times they played last year (and the 2 tmes they played the year before)against the boks, 29-15 in NZ and 27-38 at Ellis Park.
What else do you need to leave "Ifland" that this last result at your emblematic Ellis Park where the AB outplayed and outscored 5 tries to 4 the Boks?

"you cannot for one moment deny that Bismarck's first yellow card has changed the entire dynamics of that game".
You say that you don't speculate but you do. And if a yellow card to one player in the 15th minute (when you have the entire match ahead) changes all for a springbok team and they are not capable of getting over it, this springboks team has a huge problem. They were not only unable to get over it but the same player made an ofense deserving another yellow card, hence he was redcarded.

 Matfield again showing why many consider him a genius.

 Talking about ref callings that changes the "entire dynamics" of a game, one of the most blatant that I've ever seen (the most that I remember now) clearly benefited the springboks against Wales in the recent EOYT and it seems that you forgot it very quickly.
It was one of the worst refereeing that I've ever seen also. Alain Rolland made a messs, didn't know how to manage the scrumms resulting in 2 yellow cards (one of them to the recently entered into the field Oosthuizen) but the worst of all came when only 15 minutes were left.
Sooner in this match SA took the lead in the 18th minute thanks to 2 tries (6-17 for the boks) but since then and during 47 minutes (untill the 65th minute) the welsh dominance was overwhelming and even if the welsh weren't capable of scoring tries they were steamly reducing the boks advantage penalty after penalty untill they reduced it to just 2 points, 17-15. And then a try was conceded to the boks when Fourie was 2 meters in front of the kicker du Preez. It was a so blatant offside that it was incredible how Rolland or his assistants couldn't see it but the worst was that they didn't use the TMO.
With that call Rolland stopped the welsh come-back on a dime. With 15 minutes left and 9 points of diference the welsh collapsed.
That was a call that really changed the "entire dynamics" of the match. And you not ony forget it but pretend that because of that win, another win against the 10th in the world (Scotland) and another one against the 6N wooden spoon France, you are better than the AB........   Come on.....

Nice try ABm nice try. Show  me one instance where I said or denied anything about the legality of the try against Wales. I have never denied that it changed the game. Look again. I have not said that SA would have won that game when Bismarck was carded. Not once. The only speculation was from the guys who either said that SA would have won, or that NZ would have won in any case. What nobody can deny, accept maybe a few arrogant die-hard kiwi supporters, was that SA was well in the game up to that stage. What would, could or should have happened, nobody can tell. Not me and definitely not you, Sasuke or anybody else.

As a matter of interest, I do not wear blinkers. I had one hell of an argument for days on end, on the SS forum about the RWC QF, and quite a few on here can vouch for that. I have always maintained that Bryce Lawrence has played his part in that game but that SA had the game in the bag, despite Lawrence. Unfortunately we stuffed it up in the dying minutes ourselves. That is apart from the other silly mistakes and decisions during the game. I am  realistic about these things and I was slated for saying that, even though we could have made it to the semi-finals, I seriously doubt whether we would have beaten NZ in the semi-final.

As far as the Bismarck/Poite saga is concerned, I have always maintained that Bismarck was his own worse enemy in that game. He knew he was on a yellow card and he should have been more careful. The red card was his own stupid mistake. The fact that it turned out to be a red was not his fault, but getting carded for the elbow charge was 100% his own fault. There was one hell of a long thread about the "illegal" tackle on Carter, where the kiwi supporters where like little kids over a toy about the malicious illegal tackle on Carter, all because of an uneducated kiwi commentator who doesn't know the laws of the game.

Fact is that this entire argument is about one specific game  and the dynamics in that game. No result and dynamics of any other game is of any importance. I have not even read your lamentations about the Wales and other games because it has no bearing about the specific game between SA and NZ and/or the outcome of the RC.

 Scientists considering renaming Higgs Boson the Matfield particle - out of respect for his intellect

World peace
Inventing the first car to run on water
Detecting subterranean gold veins by the quivering of his flowing locks
Rendering the All-Black lineout impotent
Correctly predicting the outcome of the 2015 World Cup .........

All in a day's work for Sir Matfield !!

Newsflash !!! ....... This just in from the high veld
According to early reports Victor Matfield has just saved a woman and her two small children from certain drowning in the Vaal River.
When asked about the situation, Mr Matfield confessed that he had just got done with his usual tackling practice which consists of chasing down and form tackling a large herd of kudu and was resting beside the river having just eaten one of the larger male Kudu that he had high tackled and killed because it looked at him funny. 
Sir Matfield said that he heard screams and saw the young lady clutching her children being swept downstream in the torrid current. With a leap he dove into the river and surfaced in the middle of the river right beside the helpless woman. She gasped, not for lack of air, but at the sight of this human Thor arising from the water, come to rescue her. With one swoop mighty Victor placed a child on each bicep and the young lady, who had by now gone limp and succumbed to the manly aura, he placed on his chest. With a single kick of his legs, they were back to shore.

Mrs van de Merwe had nothing but gratitude for her hero and when reached for comment had this to say, " His pecs were firm, yet soft - like a soft-boiled egg or perfect wors roll. Not for a minute was I concerned for my safety as his chest is so large, each side is like its own life raft. The whole time was just so dreamy. I told Piet moenie worry nie as he was still my skattebol."
In recognition of his gallant effort King Matfield would not confirm or deny reports that Heyneke Meyer had promised him a spot on the Bok squad but only went as far as to guarantee that the Boks would win the next World Cup even if it meant he would have to put the whole team on his chest !!