The Real Record of Bok coaches

Huge amounts of nonsense has been written about the narcissist Rassie Erasmus. But how do his numbers stack up against long tenured Bok coaches. Here are the numbers, with draws being scored as half a point.

Carel du Plessis…..3 wins/5 losses….37.5% win ratio

Ian McIntosh….5/6….45.4%

Coetzee….12/13…..48%

Streauli….12/11….54.6%

Viljoen….8.5/6.5….56.7%

Markgraaf….8/5….61.5%

Nienaber….8/5…..61.5%

PdV…..30/18….62.5%

Harrassmiss Complex…..25.5/39….65.3%

Harrassmiss…..17.5/8.5….67.3%

Jake White….36.5/17.5…..67.6%

HM …. 33/48…..68.75%

Mallet…..27/11…..71.0%

Christie…..14/0…..100%

So what do we make of all this. 

Firstly we had several failures….McIntosh, Du Plessis, Coetzee and Streauli……replaced by much more successful coaches in Christie, Mallett, White and Harrassmiss. Good decisions by SA Rugby. You might only say they waited too long in the case of Destroyli and Coetzee.

Then there are a bunch of maligned coaches whose records are actually average….Markgraaf who is no worse than Nienaber,  and PdV who also won a Lions series (bit of perspective) who was slightly better than Nienaber. 

And then you have Erasmus who is either 67.3% or 65.3% depending on whether you believe the fairy story that he had no part  in the RC this year. If you accept  he was the head coach all the time he is a 65.3% coach, albeit with a WC which counts for bonus points in my book.

Still anyway you look at it, his record is below that of Jake White.

So we go forward with 3 GOAT candidates Christie, Mallett and Jake. What Kitch accomplished with a losing team handed over by McIntosh can’t be equaled. A perfect record and a WC. Stellar!

Number 2 would be between Mallett with a 71.0% win ratio and the record winning streak…..and White with a 67.6% winning record and a WC. It’s in the eye of the beholder. I would give it to White on the basis of his RC win months after our WC humiliation, combined with a WC.

Mallett’ s inability to win a WC with one of our strongest teams and the fact that his tenure ended with a series of losses count against him. We struggled in the succeeding years with his legacy, whereas White’s team went on to a Lions win and our best RC performance perhaps ever! I’m sure others will disagree but that’s my take.

The usual tired old clichés…..’not fit enough to polish Rassie’s boots’. The numbers tell the story.  And if you want to use the expression it would be ‘not fit to tie his boots’. It has nothing to do with fitness. Hilarious!

Jake’s curve ended with winning the WC and no coach plied his trade with less support:

‘Then White was summoned in the middle of the November tour of Europe to answer a no-confidence vote from the Blue Bulls, and talked his way out of that. The Boks helped him by beating England at Twickenham for the first time in seven years. 

This year, he was forced by Saru heads Oregan Hoskins and Mike Stofile to include Luke Watson in the Boks squad. 

Despite all of that, and frequent threats by the government that they'd force quotas on White if he didn't play more blacks, White persisted with his selection-on-merit rule. Now that he's won the World Cup, he is reluctant to give up the reins.’

….I had my sequence wrong, the RC was played with Jake being threatened with firing because of the quota issue, which destroyed morale. And then on the YE tour he faced a Bools vote of no confidence and had to fly back to South Africa…so the Boere could try to get the Engelsman.

The whole of 2006 was destroyed with political assassination attempts, the team was distracted, White had no allies. It should be expunged from the record in it’s entirety.,,,,Harrassmiss was given free reign, White was bullied.

Throw out 2006 and his record is 31.5/10.5 or 75%….way better than Harrassmiss or Mallett.

What is clear is that tests played can never be the way to determine  the effectiveness of coaches  - since .since there are anomalies in the tests programs that varied substantially from time to time 

White was not the best coach we had -  he had problems as to player management - he was totally deficient in backline coaching  and he had a poor PR problem. 

I agree tests played can never be the way to determine effectiveness….tests won is the right measure, everything else is noise.

"And then on the YE tour he faced a Bools vote of no confidence and had to fly back to South Africa…so the Boere could try to get the Engelsman."

What utter BS...

Actually I put that bait out there just for you Draad….  Strike!!!

With Rassie present his record is 68.75%

Played 32, won 22, drew 1, lost 9

Mozart is a nut case -0 and a bad one at that.    When people for instance cannot look at wider implications and think playing tests against the Lions is equal to playing a series against Scotland, Italy and Samoa  is equal for evaluation purposes - then one has to accept he has a problem.   When eh fail to see anything else it is simplistic.

When someone does not realize that the norm for consideration of backline attacks is the of tries and then  come up with a situation where he claims that scoring of 16 tries is ore effective than 31 tries and that 35 tries is better than 40 tries then to have a realistic discussion with him is impossible.    

Mozart's objectivity has years ago departed insofar as performance evaluation is concerned and prejudice and hatred took over.  Nobody can really do anything about that and logical discussion is pointless.    Rather talk to a blank wall and not to him.     

"Actually I put that bait out there just for you Draad….  Strike!!!"

Nice try Moz...that was probably a dig at me and Mike, but "wat die hard van vol is loop die mond van oor". You've been taking this shots for a long time now and I bite every time. I know it's in jest, but there is something to it though...something you have in common with Rudeneck. 

I know you're not a bigot, but the Soutie vs Boertjie rivalry is still very much alive in South Africa...let's not rehash the Boer War...funny how Rudehole picked "Rooinek" for a handle  to troll the internet...some army corporal must have left some scars...what's your pebble in the shoe?

"...who will ever forget the 49-0 against Oz."

My bakkie got stolen on that day...with a load of braai-wood, plenty of meat and a case of beer...someone had a nice braai, but for me a lank crap day...starting with the loss to Aus.

Kakkest ever...had some sh!t with the insurance too...ah well, you play the hand your dealt. 

The 49 to zero was proof the team had completely imploded….thinking Jake was toast and a bunch of quota players would be put in the team. It was a silent protest. The whole 2006 season was warped by this. You all know this, but it’s useful to not acknowledge it. The game.

And if any of our coaches ended on a high it was Jake. He had the strength and flexibility to come back, none of our other coaches have done that. Mallett was an elevator going down, same with Destroyli….looks like that might be the case with Harrassmiss.

Jake ended with the WC and on a high.

Draad I have some Boer in my genes. Helps with the physical stuff…..but you pure breads are seriously screwed up with victimology. It continues to haunt you. The whole nationalist party thing ended in tears because there was no flexibility, no worldliness. 

The same attitude spills out in incidents like de Kock and the knee….and then because he’s a seuntjie  he is forgiven for folding  like a tissue and also forgiven abandoning his national team with the feeblest excuses….and given that thing every boertjie craves, he’s a victim.

That’s why Ernie won 4 majors and tiny little Gary with so much less physical talent won 9.

When I was about 12 I had to ride my bike through a neighborhood of anti English boertjies on the way back from school.  Fortunately I was faster than them and “rooi, wit en blou is die Engels gebrou’ was countered with “Afrikaner’s vrot bananas’ as I buzzed by. 

When we came back to the Cape a year later I was amazed at how benign relationships were. In Springs it was war.

The tragedy of the Boer, and it’s a sad history is very repetitive …filled with principled resistance against bigger forces and ultimately capitulation. A little flexibility, a little humour, a little English cunning would have produced much better outcomes.

I say that with only sympathy in my heart and great respect for a talented people.

Jake came back when?   In 2007 when the AB\s in the Tri-Nations 33-6?     How come Erasmus dod not reach a higher position  than Jake.   Beating England 15-6 and be bottom of the Tri-Nations log  is not all that high.   Erasmus beat a stronger England team 32 12 with  two converted tries being scored - no9ne under White -  and won the RC as well - the first country ever to win bth the RC and WC in the same year.  

Then we have the conspiracy theory about   Jake Whit being so popular with the team that  he would be fired because of incompetence.     That is a real joke - it is so farfetched it is unbelievable.     Sure there was a plot involving getting rid of White - but that was hatched by the Bulls and the Cheetahs to get Meyer appointed as coach.     In the end the two Unions supported by the Watson supporting unions got rid of  White  after the WC - the objective ebing to appoint Meyer as Springbok coach.   The majority of the Unions opposed Meyer's appointment  - subsequent experience after 2012 indicated they ere correct not to appoint him.  

It was open news that White was effectively fired because the players whose contracts were to be renewed  refused to sign renewal of contract if White remains as coach.    So eht wpould have made him so popular in 2016?        

The usual Tokkie Bosman’s mother rubbish….and Dave still supporting his mother’s crush on Cheeky. Dumb is forever.

It is not anybody's story.   When somebody makes wild and false BS statements on site and is  properly refuted by facts it always ends up in comments like the latest crap.  

Properly  refuted by facts…..   waaaaaaaahahahaha….. that made my day. I provided the only factual analysis of our coaches I have ever seen and you immediately ignored the data and went back to your standard bar room wisdom. Facts, you wouldn’t recognize a fact if it smacked you in the kisser!

No Mozart

I look at facts objectively - you either ignore facts and create fiction.    Fact is that the White era had serious ups and downs and that he was never in the class of Erasmus as coach,   He hit the surprise win of the RC in 2004 winning on point difference  and an equal number of tests won by each of the teams - but that is still to Whites credit.   However, after that series the team coached by him went south and in 2006 he was on the verge of being fired for incompetence.    He won the WC and had the luck of a pox-doctor in not meeting either New Zealand and Australia n the series.   In the play-offs the matches were against Fiji and Argentina and the final against an over-aged and useless England team.   How England reached that final is indeed amazing. 

In the final in 2007 the situation was that the English bested the  Springboks in the tight 5 and was better in defense and ball protection and recovery and the win was caused by England beg penalized  for errors  and never by better performance by the Springboks than by their English opponents.      There were no really constructive performances in the final - the game compared to 1995 and 2019  was a mess - and none of the players in the final would have made a combined team selected on merit iro of the three WC wins by the Springboks.    

Like Meyer - despite White's WC win - he  was toast and would never have been re-appointed again as Springbok coach.     .        

The same attitude spills out in incidents like de Kock and the knee….and then because he’s a seuntjie  he is forgiven for folding  like a tissue and also forgiven abandoning his national team with the feeblest excuses….and given that thing every boertjie craves, he’s a victim.

That’s why Ernie won 4 majors and tiny little Gary with so much less physical talent won 9....I don't agree, Gary was just on another level...once in a lifetime master.

When I was about 12 I had to ride my bike through a neighborhood of anti English boertjies on the way back from school.  Fortunately I was faster than them and “rooi, wit en blou is die Engels gebrou’ was countered with “Afrikaner’s vrot bananas’ as I buzzed by. Unfortunately this kind of BS still happens...so stupid. It's obviously better in the Western Cape, even on the platteland, but there's still a devide...I've also been on the receiving end many times...

When we came back to the Cape a year later I was amazed at how benign relationships were. In Springs it was war.

The tragedy of the Boer, and it’s a sad history is very repetitive …filled with principled resistance against bigger forces and ultimately capitulation. A little flexibility, a little humour, a little English cunning would have produced much better outcomes. It mainly stems from rigid religious dogma, manipulated by those in power...you do what the Dominee tells you is right...it's changing though.

I say that with only sympathy in my heart and great respect for a talented people.

We ere shaped by our enviro nment first in Europe and the last 370 years here...political and physical environment...the Dutch setup was quite different to the other European colonies of the era...private sector driven apposed to pure colonial expansion. 

Interesting point on the private sector expansion….I never quite thought of it that way, but it’s true. That Dominee thing was a huge factor.

Tokkie you say none of the 2007 players would make  a combined team of our 3 WC winners? I assume you mean none of the performances because in my view many would make the combined team:

Os (maybe, I prefer the Beast), Victor, Juan, Schalk, Habana….perhaps Fourie du Preez, I prefer Joost the Lion heart.

But your harping on the 2007 final, which was no more defensive than the 1995 final ignores the tactical imperative. In 1995 we were clear underdogs and placed a huge emphasis on defence. In 2019 the team,  heavily criticized for being too defensive against Wales, were underdogs again and surprised the Poms by limiting the up and unders.

2007 was the only WC final we played as favorites. We had thrashed the Poms in a brilliant display of attacking rugby in the pools, winning 36 to zero, probably our best game ever in a WC. 

In the final we decided to limit the tactics, because we believed we could win via our pack. It ended up being closer than we thought but we were in total charge in the second half. Perhaps we were too cautious, but we didn’t want to blow it. Comprende?

"Interesting point on the private sector expansion….I never quite thought of it that way, but it’s true."

Jan van Riebeeck was sent here by the board of directors of the DEIC.

"The Dutch East India Company, officially the United East India Company (Dutch: Vereenigde Oost Indische Compagnie[f]; VOC), was a multinational corporation founded by a government-directed consolidation of several rival Dutch trading companies (voorcompagnieën) in the early 17th century. It is believed to be the largest company to ever have existed in recorded history"

"Dutch Republic (1581–1795)

Dutch East India Company factory in Hugli-Chuchura, Mughal Bengal by Hendrik van Schuylenburgh, 1665

After declaring their independence, the provinces of Holland, Zeeland, Groningen, Friesland, Utrecht, Overijssel, and Gelderland formed a confederation. All these duchies, lordships and counties were autonomous and had their own government, the States-Provincial. The States General, the confederal government, were seated in The Hague and consisted of representatives from each of the provinces.

In the Dutch Golden Age, spanning much of the 17th century, the Dutch Empire grew to become one of the major seafaring and economic powers, alongside Portugal, Spain, France and England. Science, military, and art (especially painting) were among the most acclaimed in the world. By 1650, the Dutch owned 16,000 merchant ships.[90] The Dutch East India Company and the Dutch West India Company established colonies and trading posts all over the world, including ruling the northern parts of Taiwan between 1624–1662 and 1664–1667. The Dutch settlement in North America began with the founding of New Amsterdam on the southern part of Manhattan in 1614. In South Africa, the Dutch settled the Cape Colony in 1652. Dutch colonies in South America were established along the many rivers in the fertile Guyana plains, among them Colony of Surinam (now Suriname). In Asia, the Dutch established the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia), and the only western trading post in Japan, Dejima.

Many economic historians regard the Netherlands as the first thoroughly capitalist country in the world. In early modern Europe, it had the wealthiest trading city (Amsterdam) and the first full-time stock exchange. The inventiveness of the traders led to insurance and retirement funds as well as phenomena such as the boom-bust cycle...  "

Sorry for the off topic post, but it's a bit of interesting trivia.

16000 merchant ships in 1650 is  40 times what I’d have guessed.

Real Illuminati material.

The question is that the players you prefer were for some reason or another made a mess of the 2007 final.   It was a game where the emphasis were on poorer defense than in 1995 and 2019.  The game against Wales you always referred to was buggered up by defective ball handlings  - two easy  tries were  buggered up by poor ball skills  -  both times involving  Willi9e le Roux.   The one was a knock-on by Le Roux with an open line in front of them and the other a forward pass to Mapimpi  with a similar situation.    

In  2007 the Springboks were the favorites  after the Springboks won the  England round robin game, but lost the plot against Tonga and Fiji - which were  substandard performances, while New Zealand and Australia went south in performances against weaker teams and ended up outside of the  playoffs.    In  both 1995 and 2019 the Springboks were far from being the favorites  and that at the start of the WC series the Springboks started both series as outsiders.

In  the 2007 final where there were serious deficiencies in major aspects of the game displayed by the Springboks in defense, in backline ball usage and tactics.   The Springboks win was caused by England disciplinary problems, the Springboks did not pose an attacking threat on the whole final - they never really were convincing in any attacking play and there were near to no kicking game that could be called strategic.    In 2007 the forwards became .ineffective and the  Springboks did not show up when it came to ball protection and recovery.   Scrumming in 2007 was never  stronger than the English scrumming and the scrums of the Springboks showed some deficiency.    The other problem is that the Springboks played exactly the game the English team wanted them to play - keeping the game amongst the forwards with backline attack totally out of the picture.   There were according to comments by Smit - no planned attacks that could threaten the English tryline.   In the one attack where the tryline by the Springboks  the ball never got to the flyhalf and at the breakdown ball possession was lost by forward deficiency. les than 5 meters out.   

In 1995 at least the Springboks played a tactical final match and in 2019 even more so - the 2007 match  was typical 10 man rugby and when the ball went beyond the flyhalf Steyn messed it up by twice causing ball turnovers.   .The only real threat in attacking rugby was by the English and ended up by the English wing touching the flyhalf a meter out while in the process of touching down for a try.   

With better tactics the 2007 final would have been a foregone conclusion  taking into account the big round robin win over the English - but the tactics went south in the final.    The problem was two great attacking assets - Habana and Pietersen - were nowhere to be seen in the 2007 final.    The difference was in 2007 Ashton outwitted White - in the finals  in  1995 Christie  outwitted  Mains - while in 2019  Erasmus totally outwitted Jones.

When it came to that aspect both Christie and especially  Erasmus were miles ahead of White - who had a one-dimensional game plan where Springbok real assets were nullified.   That is why it as so hard to select a combined team of players in the  three WC' finals played and why the 2007 would not have had a single  2007 final player in such a combined finals team - not even Matfield would have made the grade - the England Tight 5 on the whole were better than the Springboks one - and both Juan Smith and Burger was largely outplayed by the England loosies.   Vermeulen were miles better than Rossouw.    Pollard was better than either Stranski or  James - and despite your blinkers - De Allende was better than Fransie and  Le Roux.

On the whole White was a one-dimensional coach  and in 2004 by winning 2 of the 4 matches  played  and  a marginally better point deference caused the Springboks winning of the series.   In 2005  point difference favoring NZ was much wider and the  Springboks lost out.   The RC series in 2006 and 2007 were disastrous.    So even on that level there as a difference in respect of team coaching.     When Erasmus lost in tests in the 2021 RC - the margins of victory by opponents where nowhere near to what it were in 2006 and 2007. 

                     .   .      .   .                            .     e   

HM ….68.75

JW…..67.6%

Hun….65.3%

Case closed

Mozart is happily living on Cloud 9 again - with nothing sound ever to say - all make-believe.  Erasmus was Acting Head Coach - that was from   May 2018  until November 2019,    Remember all the drivel you write on site then.    Nienaber took over in January 2020.   

When the Springboks did well Nienaber got the credit from you, when they do not Erasmus got the blame.   So either you must accept   that Erasmus was never appointed as Contractual Springbok Head Coach.   

Of course he wasn’t Contractual Springbok coach….nor did he choose Nienaber….nor was he coaching from the water boy role, he was just asking the players if they wanted still or sparkling…..and in his tape when he says this is Rassie Erasmus here, that wasn’t him, that was really Nienaber.

But fine lets accept your argument that Nienaber took over in January of 2020….after all that’s what the record says…..and that gives him a 17.5/8.5  or 67.3% record…..5th behind Christie, Mallett, HM and White.