Naas Botha has a shocker

These old videos on the home page are a treat. Thanks Ed....how about some of the real oldies eg with Frik du Preez, Mannetjies Roux and Gainsford.

For those who have heard Naas pontificating about today's players, check out his contribution in the first test against the NZ Cavaliers. An absolute shocker....I would say he pretty much lost that test on his own.....hell he must have missed 10 kicks at goal if you include his incessant dropping.

We also have the unusual sight of a South African back division that is much more potent than their NZ opponents.....and then of course there is the smooth flow of Danie Gerber in full flight, scrums with no crouch, touch and engage, genuine hooking and penalties for lifting in the lineouts. Lot's of fun compared to some of the plodding professional stuff we see today.

Mozart

We always tend to remember wonderful things about players and forgot how pathetic they were at times.   One game I will remember always was a club championship final between Tukkies and Maties - where Naas Botha did a Jantjies on the field and that was behind the goal line.  Like Jantjies did when he saw Aplon coming for him - Naas saw Rob Louw coming for him - and dropped the ball.   

ESPN recentky showed the 1995 WC final and I was amazed how badly Joost played in that game - knocking on balls, pathetic service to the backline and poor kicking.  He was anytime as bad as Hougaard is at present - so there is still some hope for Hougaard.   Joost became Springbok captain and was the master tehnician of standing behind mauls waving his arms for forwards to form up - so that he could pass to them.   The new laws put pay to that,  since the ball must now be used within 5 seconds - and since Du Preez perfected the Joost technique - he would also have to adjust and one wonders how effective he would be under such circumstances.

Some of the Springbok greats had often had bad games that we do not really care to remember - mostly later in their careers when illegal and useless tactics were used by them in an effort to get over the declining levese in their performances.   That is why it is so dangerous to hang on to players who have been over their "sell by" dates.

yes old naas had a very bad game. that being said the quality of the players in terms of attacking abilty is light years ahead of the rubbish we see today. to be fair it was all about mentality for me. the players went out there with a attackiing mindset and not the conservative mindset we see today. the defence lines were less structured.

rugby has to many rules and teams need to be allowed to play the game and not be over reffed. the ref has to much influence on the game and that in itself is allowing the game to become more stagato.

the biggest change for me was the depth and quality of the backline on display there. the backline then was world class. we played a more dynamic type of rugby then and as the net result we were far more productive and far more sucessfull. layiing too rest the urban myth that winning rugby is a defense obessed kicking game in stead of a multi phased dynamic rugby gameplan where you need to attack a team on different fronts.

as i said before comparing the videos it seems like SA rugby has gone backwords since 95 with glimpses of greatness in between.

BIG CHANGE IS NEEDED

Carpetmuncher

Whether we like it or not - the backline decline in fact started in the 1980's.   Before that the key play was a 15 man-game in which the backline play was dominated by WP - the 10 man game by the Bulls.  The Bull's game plan got the upper hand in the late 1980's and with rare interuptions continued from then up to today.

After 1992 all coaches were (where they did play rugby on higher level) - forward players - bar the five months Carl Du Plessis was coach.  I can remember Du Plessis said that the tryscoring record of the Springboks was abysmal and he started trying to correct it.   Before that process could be completed, Du Plessis was fired and since then was only interrupted when White called in Eddie Jones to help out in 2007.

This is really where  Meyer lost the ball completely.  Instead of grabbing the opportunity to get real coaching done -

*   he kept on playing disfunctional backline performers like Morne Steyn and now De Jongh;

*   appointed a nonentity as backline coach; and

*   a forward as attack coach.

It is evident that there are backline players with massive abilities - such as Pietersen and Habana - but the problems developed through selection of useles attacking players inside of them that should never have been anywhere near the national team, as well as abysmal coaching coupled to player development.  Unless those issues are addressed comprehensively - we will never ever see a decent Springbok backline.

Meyers choice of backline coach is so bizarre that one cannot but wonder how much political pressure he was under. Picking a Vodacom baclin ecoach with little expereince is a quota selection.  That said he also overlooked the best defensive coach in world rugby Nieaber for a bulle guy.

So what is potting?

Mike this is a tragedy. An issue that is so simple to solve that the mind boggles at the rank stupidty and I personally can scarcely believe Meyers selection of assistant coaches.  I think though we have seen better backline play recently and the Stormers lack of backline creativity has been a warning to all. 

its a huge problem and yet we see the same old problems week in and week out....

Meyer and saru can really make there own lives so much easier by employing a overseas backline attacking consultant and a skills coach to rememedy the cancerious lack of a better word backline play.

there is nothing major to be overhauled but there is a lack of techical skills as those who know the game can see it and the blatant fact that those in charge can understand the impact it has nor want ot change it correctly really  makes it even worse.

the new rules changes will hurt the meyer brand of rugby really badly so we will see how the this tour goes down.