What should be done insofar as SA Rugby is concerned

There are three spheres which are totally defective and needs to be corrected, namely -
*   the SARU management;*   the coaching situation; and*   the player selection scenario
The SARU Management
The  question arises as to how the SARU Board is selected.   On the basic level the clubs select there franchise the franchise board - who then select the Chairman and Vice Chairman that would represent the franchise on the National Council.
There are two problems with this problem and those are that elections could be hijacked by politicos and that it means that stakeholders are selected without any professional abilities in rugby and almost nobody of them played professional rugby in their lives.
In essence there is no real intention to deal with the professional era and there is no interest to ensure the survival of professional rugby.   The provincial boards are only interested in how much money can be syphoned off to the amateur clubs and how they can keep their places on the provincial boards.
The SARU board are similarly not qualified to deal with professional rugby as a sport.   They also have n idea about how rugby should be run as a professional sport.
There should be a norm laid down that there is a complete separation between amateur rugby and professional rugby.   The present board could manage amateur rugby and should have no role to play in professional rugby.
On the professional side there should be some limitations placed.   No person who have NOT played professional rugby should be on the Board and the Board president should be a person who played for the national side.   The fact is that business management experience should also be a requirement.
The Coaching Set-up 
I am sorry to say - but the amateurs should have no role to play in the appointment of coaches.   The appointment of Coetzee was a closed shop arrangement and the post was never advertised.    It was clear that the appointment was decided on by the Minister of Sport in collaboration with Hoskins and Wakefield.  
It was never a case where there was any professional interest in the appointment of the coach.   Coetzee was largely ineffective in the case of the Stormers and his game plan was no doubt Jake-Ball - not rugby.  
The absence of a game plan is primarily the cause of the present diabolical situation.
One should have as a coach who played rugby on professional level with a special reference to people management and team building - at present those two aspects is entirely missing.
The position of coach should be advertised and the selection should be based on the ability to build teams - to promote team spirit and to - to have the abilities to enhance comprehensive rugby as a way to go.  
Team Selection 
There is at present an over-emphasis of experience and unfortunately it does not go hand-in-hand with performance.   When players routinely under=performed on lower level they should never be anywhere near the Springbok team.   The myth that these under-performing players suddenly up their performance when playing for the  Springboks is real tripe - an under-performer on lower level should never be selected.


Selection of player should be based purely on merit and without political interference.   There should also be a sincere review of abilities of players - both mentally and physically.     In the case of mental ability there are two factors, namely -
*    fighting spirit incorporated in team spirit; and*    ball sense and ball handling.
In the case of physical ability the norms are not met.   We still have players in the Springbok team who are either physically deficient and when not are best be described as "loafers" - whose performance are seriously deficient.
Players should be subjected to international norms insofar as physical suitability of professional rugby players are concerned.    
 
       
   

Ag kak.

 Typical from an idiot who does not have the ability to think about rugby as a professional sport and come up with no real alternative to the present malaise.  

My alternative is to get a coach who can motivate the team, stop selecting Currie Cup heroes....play a balanced game which is consistent with our strengths. All the other "structures" stuff is a red herring. Structures were imperfect when we won the WC in 2007 and the TN in 2009. All this bureaucratic BS will take 10 years to fix, and then we will still lose to Italy if we select duds, show no heart and play like fools.

 Mozart
This from an idiot we claims to be s top class business manager.   He wants a coach and the question is how is a coach to be appointed and managed - that is of no importance to him. 
I have a answer to you and that is embodied in the Japan test last year - Japan a much lower rated team than Italy.   We select duds, show no heart and played like fiools in that game and you supported the duds and fools in that team - so what now?
If SA rugby is run by a set of amateur fools we will never come right and always ends up with a coach like Coetzee.  

 We wont be served by a bunch of bureaucrats and committees giving us coaches and tactics. Fortune 500 companies may need committees and processes....not a group of 23 rugby players. All the Boks need is one competent rugby dictator. All the processes wont bear fruit for years, let SARU play around with them....but give us one competent coach in the meantime.

 A competent rugby dictator engendering no loyalty and team spirit and tata goes your stupid dream.