Most impactful Springbok coach since 1992 - Final verdict

So I've spent quite a bit of time on this.... if you have no constructive criticism, stay away.

Based on win percentage and the quality of opposition, the strongest case can be made for Kitch Christie as the greatest Springbok coach post-1992, with Nick Mallett and Rassie Erasmus close contenders. However, when factoring in context, pressure, trophy significance, and opposition strength, Rassie Erasmus emerges as the most influential coach.

Here’s a breakdown to justify that claim:

Motivation for Best Springbok Coach: Rassie Erasmus

Why Rassie?

1. Won the 2019 Rugby World Cup just 18 months after taking over a team in disarray.
2. Beat top-tier nations in the World Cup knockout stages: Japan (hosts), Wales (ranked 2nd), England (hot favourites).
3. Restored national pride and unity through strong leadership.
4. Served as Director of Rugby in 2023, guiding Nienaber and the Boks to a second World Cup win.
5. Took bold tactical risks (e.g. 6-2 bench split, "Bomb Squad", video refereeing critique).
6. Beat the British & Irish Lions in 2021 (massive challenge, only every 12 years).

Comparative Table: Springbok Coaches Ranked by Key Criteria

Some titbits:

1. Kitch Christie remains the only Springbok coach with a perfect record, winning all 14 of his matches, including the 1995 Rugby World Cup.
2. Nick Mallett boasts a strong win percentage of 71%, leading the team to a record 17 consecutive Test victories during his tenure.
3. The coaching duo of Rassie Erasmus and Jacques Nienaber has been instrumental in South Africa's recent successes, including the 2019 and 2023 Rugby World Cup victories.
4. Heyneke Meyer and Jake White both achieved commendable win percentages of 66%, with White leading the team to a World Cup victory in 2007.

My Final Verdict:

While Kitch Christie remains the only unbeaten coach and won the 1995 World Cup, and Nick Mallett led the Boks to an unmatched 17-game win streak, Rassie Erasmus edges ahead due to:

1. The context of rebuilding a broken team.
2. Beating more Tier 1 nations in must-win games.
3. Innovating under pressure and reshaping modern Springbok identity.
4. Influencing success even when not head coach (2023).

Rassie Erasmus is the most impactful Springbok coach of the professional era.

(stats courtesy of: David Searle's book of everything that humakind needs to know -vol 2027)

Winning percentages are influenced by WC years. In 2019 Rasmus was 10/1….in 2024 he was 11/2. Remove 2023 from the Data, no other coach had 2 WCs and the win ratio drops to about 60%. Not good enough.

No innovation except gimmicks, no backline excellence….a turnaround of the Bok fortunes by going back to our traditional strengths which should never have been neglected. Competent, a good rapport with the players…..but lucky and benefitting from the enlarged talent pool of black players.

Well behind White and Mallett.

I know Rassie has won 2 RWCs but for me it will always be Nick Mallett.

That side of 1997/8/9 was in between two long periods when we were rubbish and Gary Teichmann's Springboks . . . Andre Venter, Henry Honiball, Joost van der Westhuizen, Krynauw Otto, Pieter Muller, Mark Andrews, Andre Snyman and so many others remain my favourite Springbok team of all time. They made us proud Springbok supporters again after (and before) such a long drought.

"No innovation except gimmicks"

It's like saying AB de Villiers reverse sweep is a gimmick!

I say... keep the gimmick coming if it helps us win!

Is the Bomb Squad a gimmick?

is Cheslin, Mapimpi and Arendse's strike rate a gimmick?

Moz, Im a HUGE admirer of both Nick and Jake... so i certainly won't bash their achievements (please note this), but...

You keep bashing down Rassie's achievements.

it's a bit childish.

"it's a bit incredibly childish"

Fixed.

Bwhahahahaha Beat me to it Rooi. How many more have to say it!?

Great post Chippo.

Dense, do you know of an Aussie band called Sons of the East? They're about to go on a world tour through Australia, Europe and the USA.

They're a trio from Sydney. Give them a listen. I'm going to their concert in Paris on 26 September and I literally can't wait.

Nope, I haven't heard of them didn't even know they existed until you mentioned them on here.

Yep I've listened to a few of the songs, get the feeling their music grows on you so I'll listen a while more.

Think there's a bit of Woody Guthrie in there.

Play us some of your favorites.

Enjoy the concert.

Thanks man!

Posting my favourites on the Sons of the East thread in the Trumpet.

'Onya!

"'Onya!"

Think I just threw up in my mouth a little.

Well, you can't deny any world cup winning coach as each coach had their own challenges. 95 was a completely different era, but to bring the boks back to the top of the world is something special, but then we crashed afterwards but only for Nick to pick us up, then we went through a few coaches and ended up with White, after that Snorre. Hard to credit him as the boks just got worse every year and we never really recovered from the mess he created. Meyer started well and had a good run until the wold cup year when he lost to Argentina and Japan. To me he was to robotic and became predictable and played awful rugby.

Then came Coetzee and how bad was he?!

Rassie Nienaber has done the most for the boks.

There will be dips every world cup cycle.

But I did love that Mallet era. Probably the best rugby we ever played.

But don't forget, as are the only team that ayes the all blacks twice every year. Then add Ireland that played away lost of the time. Our win ratio will take a dip.

Where as in the 6 nations, Ireland was very dominant and the rest of the teams were extremely poor. So if course their win ratio would always look good.

This year will be telling. Is that invincible era of the all blacks over now. So many teams have started to win in New Zealand and they have struggled for the last 6 years to assert themselves like they use to. But I will never write them off.

Rassie biggest test will actually be this year when we play NZ, France and Ireland away

I would love a flawless year but he won't get that if he keeps cycling through players.

We will slip a few this year...we need to be solid in NZ...

Your win % is wrong - Rassie is higher than 65%

Rassie walks it for me - by some distance

Ranked number 1 for as long as we have and back to back WC’s including the most difficult WC road to victory just can’t be matched

Its not even close - Mallett definitely second followed by Kitch

Actually I stand corrected Chip….the bomb squad is a valid bit of innovation. I was referring to the communication lights and tactics like the open field maul formation.

But where are the backline innovations? Cheslin and Arendse scored the vast majority of their tries from turnover ball….how do you innovate that. They are unusually brilliant open field runners.

If Rasmus was the forward coach one would give him high marks….our scrumming was brilliant. But any innovating in back play was in defence.

The net of all that is that we won and we are respected, but we aren’t admired. Our rugby was too predictable and our wins too lucky and too labored.

Absolute rubbish that Kolbe and Arendse score the vast majority of their tries from turnover ball - simply not true

Our backline play is as good as any other test nation out there evidenced by the try strike rates of Kolbe, Fassi and Arendse

The Boks are right up there with clean breaks, defenders beaten and tries scored - the notion that we are underachieving in the backs is simply bullshit

Rassie experimented literally all of last year. Every game was a culling and changing of personal.

Right now we have two Test Seasons before the next WC.

This year is a real one with 4 very tough games and we could well lose all four of them.

...for me, this is the final good year for the old guns. And that's why I think that experimenting last year was such a waste of time.

There is no way most of the regular Boks make it to the next WC. Pollard is already so slow, Am looks done, Mostert and PSDT probably won't be there, neither will Faf, DDA, or Willie. Kitshoff is already gone and Bongi won't make 2027 either. Even Kriel will be 33 at the 2027 WC.

So why the hell experiment so much last year, like right after the WC?

I'd have given the old boys a glory year last year, let them smash everybody...and then start experimenting this year and letting the oldies handle the important games with 2026 being a full WC prep year.

Instead we played musical chairs in 2024, are likely going to hide behind experimentation for our losses in Europe and NZ this year and come the end of 2026 it still won't be clear what our best team is.

And Dave is right, leaving out draws and 2023 (the second WC) Rasmus is 45/20 or 69.2%, so your figure of 65% is off Chip.

If you include the second WC year and ignore draws, he is at 56/22 or 71.8%. Almost the same as Mallett, but with an extra WC….which is worth more wins than a Lions series.

Jake is lower but both Oz and NZ were strong in his era. And there were no Bargie games in the TN.

So it all comes down preferences in the end. I think even HM who lost narrowly in 2015, could have done very well with the talent that emerged in the next 10 years.

Not great but on the bright side we did beat Portugal. This stat proves the bankruptcy of our backline play. We played 3 more matches than Portugal and made 7 more clean breaks. We never played rugby …we played kick and defend.

This is what our backline did….tackle anything that moved:

2 in a row walks it.

Moz rugby is not confined to WC’s

Incorrect ButtPlug...Test rugby no longer features mid-week dirt trackers. Experimenting with the Test team is essential to determine which new players can step up and which cannot.

Even if only two new Test-level players are identified each season, that amounts to half a team during the World Cup cycle, with the remainder coming from the previous World Cup squad.

A strong core is vital for any team, and integrating new players alongside experienced ones in settled combinations is crucial. Simply replacing Test greats with unproven younger candidates, who may never become first-choice in their positions, is not the answer.

Over time, older players must be replaced by younger ones who perform at Test level, as seen with Sasha. This approach will allow the Boks to peak in time for the next World Cup. Newcomers need a few years to learn the squad’s systems and gain enough experience to be at their best for the tournament.

The World Cup is just two years away. Players like Pieter-Steph du Toit and perhaps even Eben Etzebeth could still be in contention for the next World Cup.

I would have preferred Rassie to drop older players who will certainly not make the next World Cup and are not key to the squad—for example, Vincent Koch.

Agreed Shark - Rassie obviously knows that the majority of his squad are the wrong side of 30 so he has to identify and blood the next group of players - it’s obvious

Its exactly what he should continue to do for the first few games of the season against the Barbarians, Italy (2) and Georgia.

Give these players a run in those 4 games

15 Fassi / Jordan Hendrikse / Gelant

14/11 Tambwe / Green / Horn / Edwil vd Merwe / Zas

13 Julius / Moodie / Henco v Wyk

12 Willemse / Hooker / David Kriel

10 Sacha / Libbok

9 Williams / Papier / Jayden / vd Bergh / Nohamba

1 Wessels / Mchunu / Steenkamp

2 Dweba / AH Venter / Grobelaar

3 Thomas / Sadie / Nthlabakanye / Hanro Jacobs / Klopper

4/5 Jenkins / Moerat / Ruben v Heerden / Ruan Vermaak / Cobus Wiese / JF v Heerden

6/7/8 Buthelezi / Theunissen / Hanekom / Nortje

/ BJ Dixon / Ludwig / Ruan Venter / Vincent Tsituka / JL du Preez / Roos / Dan du Preez / Manu Tsituka / Augustus

Mozart

White in a moment of honesty blamed himself for the fact that other than the 2004 Tri-nations and the 2007 RWC the teams he coached never won any significant tournaments. The weird fact is that in 2004 Trinations 6 tsts were played and each particiating team won 2 tests - so the trophy was won on point difference - a show just as farcical as the winning on Saturday as the Sharks in the match aganst Munster on Saturday being decided by kicks at goal.

Another fact is that White has a poor record of being FIRED effectively as coach by both the Springboks as well two franchice/Clubs he coached TWICE because he was causing havoc in the teams he coached. In the case of the Sharks in 2014 he lasted one year as a coach because he caused havoc in the Shaks team by his conduct as too team selection and divisions he caused insde he player squad he coached,

If you asked about his performances none of the top players he caoched at the time like Smit, Matfield and the Du Plessis brothers as well as Frans Steyn have a kind word about his coaching and team selection. When the Bulls franchise was effectively taken over ownership of the Bulls by Rupert and Motsepe - he was given a vrtual limitless budget to recruit SA players playing rugby for foreign clubs and his selection of players were farcical at best and even where he did get a choice of players his intitial recruitment was a farce,

In the end Rupert appointed Brits to manage his and Motsepe's investment in the Bulls Franchise and since thenm he did recruit some better and younger players - his main recruitment were forwards and by mistake some colored players who turned out to be successful. But his team selection for critical matches were farcical and inevtiably let to losses by the team in crucial matches.

Of the three WC coaches I think White was the worst coach of the 3 involved in winning the RWC by some distance. In comments after the 2007 RWC Smit said if the English try was allowed the team would have to work out how to win the final by scoring a try themselves - in other words there was in planning of the match NO planning on how to score a try in the match against the English. For some reason the Springboks never played in the whole series any team ranked above then in the 2007 series, They played agaisnt an English team that was in serious decline after the 2003 RWC and it was an aged and ineffectuial team who played in the final. Fact is at the start of the RWC in 2007 the Springboks were ranked 5th in the world and the English was ranked 7th . . .

Mozart

White in a moment of honesty blamed himself for the fact that other than the 2004 Tri-nations and the 2007 RWC the teams he coached never won any significant tournaments. The weird fact is that in 2004 Trinations 6 tests were played and each particiating team won 2 tests - so the trophy was won on point difference - a show just as farcical as the winning on Saturday as the Sharks in the match aganst Munster being decided by kicks at goal.

Another fact is that White has a poor record of being FIRED effectively as coach by both the Springboks as well two franchice/Clubs he coached TWICE because he was causing havoc in the teams he coached. In the case of the Sharks in 2014 he lasted one year as a coach because he caused havoc in the Sharks team by his conduct as to team selection and divisions he caused insde he player squad he coached,

If you asked about his performances none of the top players he caoched at the time like Smit, Matfield and the Du Plessis borthers as well as Frans Steyn have no kind words about his coaching and team selection. When the Bulls franchise was effectively taken over ownership of the Bulls by Rupert and Motsepe - he was given a vrtual limitless budget to recruit SA players playing rugby for foreign cluns and his eselection of players were farcical at best and even where he ddid get a choice of players his intitial recruitment was a farce,

In the end Rupert appointed Brits to manage his and Motsepe's investment in the Bulls Franchise and since thenm he did recruit some better and younger players - his main recruitment were forwards and by mistake some colored players who turned out to be successful. But his team selection for critical matches were farcical and inevtiably let to losses by the team in crucial matches.

Of the three WC coaches I think White was the worst coach of the 3 involved in winning the RWC by some distance. In comments after the 2007 RWC Smit said if the English try was allowed the team would have to work out how to win the final by scoring a try themselves - in other words there was in planning of the match NO planning on how to score a try in the match against the English. For some reason the Springboks never played in the whole series any team ranked above them in the 2007 series, They played agaisnt an English team that was in serious decline after the 2003 RWC and it was an aged and ineffectuial team who played in the final. Fact is at the start of the RWC in 2007 the Springboks were ranked 5th in the world and the English was ranked 7th. The other teams the Springboks played against the series were the Argentina (ranked 9) and Fiji (ranked 10). Nothing similar happened the history in RWC's since 1987.

Mozart is the only person that in the rugby world that would rate White as a better coach than Erasmus - his comments are really farcical and rugby idiocy in the extreme.

. . .

Dave you say rugby is not confined to WCs. But take away Rasmus’ 11/2 and 10/1 WC years….he is at 35/19 or 64%. Average for a Bok coach despite our improved talent pool and the decline of OZ and NZ.

So if he coached a more expansive game outside WCs it was much less successful than Rasmus ball…basically scrum, tackle and rely on Pollard.

Jake White our only coach who has not lost a WC match playing on foreign fields and still top notch 22 years after first coaching the Boks. No other Bok coach had to survive a coup attempt and media abuse for not selecting a player (the provincial talent Luke Watson).

You don’t exclude WC’s or base stars solely on WC’s - that makes absolutely no sense at all

Jake never lost a WC game as he had the easiest WC ever - he only had to face England - that’s it

Compare that with Rassie’s last WC having had to play Scotland, Ireland, France, England and NZ to win in - now that is a real challenge unlike Jake’s cruise

Jake had one big thing in his favour . . . he was incredibly lucky.

I think we can all agree he was without doubt our luckiest coach ever.

His one and only RWC victory was in 2007. First he drew the easy group of South Africa, England, Samoa, Tonga and USA.

Next bit of luck for Jake was his only real opposition in the group - England - being completely off form. The Springboks thrashed them 36-0 in the pool game to top an easy group.

Next stroke of luck was the quarterfinal opposition. Not the All Blacks, not the Wallabies, not France, but Fiji. A side that had never come close to beating the Boks in their history.

Next incredible stroke of luck was the semis where all of New Zealand, Australia and France were in the other half of the draw and the Springboks got to play Argentiana, another side who - at that point in time - had never beaten the Springboks.

Jakes next stroke of luck was England beating France in the other semi so we ended up playing the same side we'd already thrashed 36-0 in the Final.

Finally, Jake got lucky again in the final when England nearly beat us with a Mark Cueto try which was disallowed for having a foot into touch when it appeared otherwise.

Without question our luckiest ever coach whose subsequent reputation for the next few decades was very inflated.

Not our worst ever coach - nowhere near Allister Cotzee, Rudolf Straeuli or Pieter de Villiers for example - but definitely our luckiest coach ever.

Weird, I guess Jake must also be very lucky to have the Bulls playing the kind of rugby that they are when the Sharks are better on paper and the Stormers aren't far off.

Perhaps it's years of experience, but the Bulls are playing fantastic rugby right now and it doesn't look like it has anything to do with luck. It looks like the result of excellent coaching and much more good ideas than bad ones.

They just as good as the Sharks looked when he coached them and just as formidable as the Brumbies did when he was in charge.

I think we're talking about Springbok coach on this thread, ButtPlug, not best or worst provincial coach.

Check out the title of the thread and get someone to explain it to you if you're still struggling.

Hope that helps.

White survived bei ng dicharged when his team plaed dismal rugby in 2006 with A ustralia beating them 49-0 in Bribane - the team performaces were substandard and Wh ite approached Thabo Mbeki for an intervuiew - but never got one, The Government love interefering in sports - but that attempt to get the President to rule over SARU was anoher reason why he did the unthinkable - a nasty precedent that would have led to even more intererence by the Government in rugby,

The other problem White has is that he helped creating rifts in the squad White started as school coach and he unfortunately treated professional players as of they were children. After his departure players like Smit and Matfield would not say a kind word about him as a coach. Erasmus was part of the WC coaching set-up - but he elft the set-up because of White's ideas about coaching and match planning.

As to coaching for the Sharks White was a similar headache, He started off with claiming there were rifts in the team between English and Afrikaans speaking players by getting rid of the Sharks captain Keegam Daniel using the alleged rifts on him. In any event during 2014 the problems got worse and when the players contracts were offered to 16 players up for renewal - they said they would not sign any contract with the Sharks while White was the oach. The same situation prevailed while Jake was the Springbok coach.

In a professional environment players must respect the Head Coach and be loyal to him and Trust him in full. Since that respect and the fact that teams he coached went issing and did stop winning of trophies and that was always the case with White,

Next bit of luck for Jake was his only real opposition in the group - England - being completely off form. The Springboks thrashed them 36-0 in the pool game to top an easy group.

Was that the England team that beat Oz and beat France who beat NZ. And the England team that won the 2003 WC? England is an effective WC team, witness their victory over NZ in 2019 and Pollard’s rescue of the Boks against them in 2023. Their direct approach, like that of the Bok’s works in WCs.

But it’s nice to know an off form Pom team can beat Oz and France.

And nice lie about the Cueto try, the replays clearly show his foot brushed the line before he grounded the ball….so much for your honesty.

White’s margin of victory in the knockouts 50 points. Rasmus in 2019 against weaker opposition 46 and in 2023 3 lucky points courtesy Pollard.

Hope that gives you some perspective.

Rooi good point about Jake’s luck - he was also lucky not to be sacked pre that WC, he came damn close but was lucky enough to inherit Eddie Jones to save his arse

Moz how the fuck were Jakes opponents more difficult than Rassie’s 2019 campaign

Jake literally only had England to overcome

Very simple Dave…..Fiji had an awesome backline and with their physicality they actually presented a challenge. By contrast we dominated the Japanese team, they had no weapons to bother us.

In the semis Jake faced a Bargie team that comfortably beat France and Scotland and thrashed Ireland. In 2019 Rasmus faced a Welsh team that was losing to France in QF before France got a red card early in the 2nd half.

In the final the 2007 Pom team with WC winners showed up, whereas the 2019 team thought they had played their final and never adapted.

In 2019 our only opponent was a distracted Pom team….the other real opponent NZ comfortably beat us in the pools.

Is the fog lifting.

That is very laughable - you can add as much glitter to Jake’s campaign as you like but the facts are - Fiji were nothing back then just like they are now and back then Argentina were nothing as well.

Reality is Jake only had to face one top tier side to win that WC - by far the easiest WC route ever

In 2019 Rassie’s Boks had to face 3 top tier sides in NZ, Wales and England to win it. They did not beat England in that final, they thrashed them

1 vs 3 top tier sides = no contest

Yeah well Fiji beat Wales in 2007. And they also beat Japan. And the ABs crushed Wales by more than 20 points in the 3rd place game in 2019. Wales are never going to be a WC challenge for the Boks or ABs.

And crucially the Boks never lost a game in 2007, Rasmus lost to Ireland and NZ, and luckily never faced them again in those WCs.

But who are the 3 top tier teams, I hope you aren’t including the ABs who beat us.

"And crucially the Boks never lost a game in 2007"

Hmmm . . . so that's "crucial" is it?

Well on 23 June 2007, the Springboks lost at home in Durban 21-26 to the All Blacks.

Then on 7 July 2007 the Springboks lost in Sydney 25-17 to the Wallabies.

Then on 14 July the Springboks werer hammered in Christchurch 33-6 by the All Blacks.

That's three losses in 2007.

So, Moffie, are you a liar or are you stupid?

It's one of the two.

LMAO!

And crucially the Boks never lost a game in 2007, Rasmus lost to Ireland and NZ, and luckily never faced them again in those WCs.

And luckily never faced them again in the those WCs.

Only a truly dishonest person would cut off the context and only a fool would not understand we are talking about WCs. I guess you qualify for both.

Rofl!

I see . . . so stupid. Ok.

LMAO!

Another banana "peal". You should hang on tighter to your zimmer frame, Moffie.

You have just been exposed as a liar yet again. But really I wouldn’t be worrying about all this, given the accommodations you can afford in Paris this is your most pressing problem:

more

Yes, there has been a significant bed bug infestation in Paris. While the initial panic was perhaps exaggerated, bed bugs are indeed a problem in the city. Several factors have contributed to this, including increased travel, insect resistance to some treatments, and the lack of widespread, coordinated pest control efforts.

….

To quote from The Fly…..be afraid be very afraid.

Bwaaaaahahahaha!

Don’t care how you put it, Fiji are nothing just like Japan are nothing

Japan beat Ireland, they beat the Boks - so what

Of course I’m counting NZ in 2019 - having to play them counts - it’s taxing paying them so certainly far more of a challenge than anything Jakes side had to face in his campaign

Here are the facts - under Jake the Boks only had to beat England to win the WC

Under Rassie in 2019 we had to face NZ, Wales and England to win it

Huge difference - one is an easy WC, the other more challenging and that’s a fact but 2019 does not come close to comparing with our last WC route to win it - no other WC campaign comes close to this last one

Both of Rassie’s campaigns were harder than Jake’s and that’s a fact

Fuck that bed bug is huge….Rooi Tit better take his shot gun with, those things will eat you alive:)

"And crucially the Boks never lost a game in 2007"

There's the lie, Moffie.

It's either a lie or an ignorant statement by a very stupid person . . . so in your case, Moffie, that would be both.

LMAO!

We faced NZ and lost

So what we still had to play them - being tough opposition

Jake’s side had no such thing

Rasmus hasn’t won his pool in 2 WCs. Losing is never a plus.

No the low class lie was editing my sentence to cut off the ending to change the context. Low class, poorly brought up dishonesty. But not surprising from a perpetual loser.

B

Mozart

Just a question - was Erasmus ever effectively fired as a oach by anybody?

It happened repeatedly to Jake White - in 2007 by SARU - in 2014 by the Sharks in 2017 by Montpellier/ He also left the Brumbes because the Aussies would not consider him as Wallaby coach in 2013. He left the Brumbies because he wanted to be nearer his family - he came back to Stellenbosch where he lived and took a job with the Sharks and when fired went to coach Montpellier and from there went to Japan. .

Because Rassie had to face top 2 ranked sides in his groups unlike Jake who only faced England

Not winning your group is of zero consequence when you end up winning the comp

As I said - it’s factual that both of Rassie’s WC’s were harder than Jake’s

No rugby follower on this planet would count playing England alone being harder than facing NZ, Wales and England

Pretty obvious

You are confusing the pre tournament schedule…..and the matches you actually had to win. It happens all the time in tennis, one player has a tough draw but upsets make it easy.

Erasmus in 2019 had the harder schedule….I believe our 2007 team had to win tougher matches. Fiji more dangerous than Japan, Bargies on a roll and a much more focused Pom team.

And they never got dominated by 10 points on the way to their WC.

And nice lie about the Cueto try, the replays clearly show his foot brushed the line before he grounded the ball….so much for your honesty

Why anyone would be so blatantly dishonest about something like this, when there is so much easily available and clear evidence out there ... says a lot.

Just fast forward on pause to 1:36 .... enough said

I think you oaks need to give Meyer a bit more credit. He had to pick up a depleted bok squad that was mismanaged from snorre and had to rely on our baby bok team from 2012 to plug the gaps. Snorre was obsessed with race and don't forget earl the pearl rose, how awful he was and snore kept messing players around. He dropped Fourie for AD Jacobs, Quality player, but never a starter. He kept messing around with Ruaan Pienaar and really pissed of Frans Steyn that the guy just went, stuff this, I'm off to France. We saw his real value when Rassie brought him back and he ended up being or 2nd bok to win two world cups.

Meyer brought through so many players that are still playing today. Kriel and Pollard, De Allende got capped under him. Etzebeth had a fair run. Although he also relied heavily on his old bulls players like Matfield and Fourie Du Preez. Think Meyer was the automatic choice after White as he knew the bulk of the players and very close to developing young talent. It should have never been Snorre or Coetzee.

To Mallet own admission, he didn't know how to much these start players that wanted to play every game and should have rotated his players more and work with them better. I think at one stage the boks had something like 26 injuries. However, the greatest test much probably was when we beat NZ with Honeyball running a line and then scissors with Slap Chip for that try. I think the Kiwis didn't realise the boks could actually play with the backline, they were so shocked at that move that they thought it was illegal. However, you look at the obstruction Ireland. NZ and Australia have been getting away with for years.

If I had to pick my favourite coach I would say Mallet. He just didn't give a dam. Very outspoken but also backs it up.

To me Rassie has never been unbeaten in the World Cup and there will always be that over his head. He has never been able to string more than 5 or 6 games winning sequences and his own demise is him being too experimental. I do think teams like Ireland, NZ, Arg, Aus and Fra has a very good chance of beating the boks.

Where as with Mallet, the boks were unplayable. Joost, Honeyball, Muir, Snyman, Montgomerry, Slapchips, Terbrlance, These were amazing players, hard as nails and super athletic, big, strong fast. This was probably the first time we could cope with the size of the Kiwi backs.

I wish they brought him back but he has no time for politics at SA rugby or the government

No ways was Fiji harder than Japan - Japan were on fire that WC

Saying England were unfocused is insulting - it was a WC

Jake had the easiest WC in history and Rassie has had the hardest - facts

KC

To praise Meyer for identfying playes is rank BS supreme. Injuries forced him to bring in New players and in some cases the number of tests new players he selected was rarely used and never coached by him as developing test players, I can mention a number of playes starting with Le Roux, Vermeulen, Du Toit, Pollard, De Jager, Kriel and De Allende, None of the above were selected as a result of injury issues and in the case of Kriel by Fourie being unfit and fat.

Matter of fact the match planning did not benefit any of the above players and in the 2015 RWC specifically was killing the new players, Take for instance in the semi against the AB's in 2015 Du Preez handled the ball 46 times and of those only 9 went to Pollard at flyhalf - the rest were kicked away by Du Preez himself, passed to forwards like Burger and Vermeulen and in rare cases to De Allende. After the Japan disaster Pollard, Le Roux. De Allende, Kriel and De Jager was used in every test and in the play-offs were tired out totally. In fact there were really 8 of the 31 man squad that was really playable and that was part of the disaster performances against the AB's in the semi.

Meyer was one of the worst coaches in the history of the Springboks and I rate him on par with De Villiers and Coetzee, In fact he was in close competition with Coetzee. Both ended up in coaching a French and Japanese team and both got fired because they were destroying the teams they were supposed to coach - both ebing regarded as BS by teh wonmers of the two clubs and sent packing by them in mid=season. Both were grossly incompetent as coaches.

The contribution Meyer did as to the development of the above players were never of any value and Erasmus had to get them back on track with self-confidence as well and that is why the playes mentioned really started to show their real value under Erasmus.

Where I do agree with you is the case of the need to find and start playing potential new players and Erasus is clear on that issue as well. s long as playes continue to prerform aon te level - irrepective of age they will be used even in the 2027 RWC. I spoke to Frans Malherbe's father a few days ago and it is clear Malherbe is near to the point of retirement. He has conunous back aches that is nto going to get better in 2025 and 2026. Some playes like Vermeiulen, Pollard, Le Roux and Kolisi is being developed as future coaches and not as players anymore - even though they will move gradually into coaching but being bench players in the case of the laltter 3. There are even doubts about Etzebeth - anothef concussion injury would men the end of his playing career as well.

So the problem remains Older players get injured more often and take longer time to recover from injuries. So lets see what happens over the enxt two yers as to player development into new test players.

,

. .

The fact is Mozart is talking BS about England being "unfocused" is BS supreme. The English backline performances were better than that of the Springboks backline - while their Tight 5 held their own in the forwards and they were better in ball protection and recovery at breakdowns and even in turnovers of possession.

One can refer to the England team handing penalty kicks for law transgressions and those were all five converted by Montgomery (4) and Steyn (1), That could be caused by players due to age and taking chances finishing off their playing careers. Incidentally England using younger players lost badly in the Round obin stage to the S ringboks and then brought in the aed players in teh final.

Smit in his subsequent comments on the final said there was no provision in the White Game plan for scoring of tries and the team would have to find a way as to scoring of a try themselves if need be. In the final both Pietersen and Habana produced one big zero and the reason was the fact they were also on the top of their performnces - but never used at their best in the final. Weird - but true they never saw a ball in backlne play.

Actually I was talking about the 2019 team being unfocused.

HM lost in the SF in 2015 against the best AB team of the last 25 years. That Bok team had 9 players who started in the 2019 final Nine players!

HM was an important link in the chain.

Dave that English team thought they had won the WC when they beat NZ….it was totally apparent in their denial after the game when they wouldn’t wear their medals.

Thanks for the clip DA. Why one would blatantly lie the way the Nek did is puzzling. I actually think he is losing it….these irascible types often fall off their perch early.

". . . these irascible types often fall off their perch early."

25 years and still applying egg to your fat face every time you open your stupid trap.

Mozart

Stop talking BS suppreme about the English team be unfocussed in 2019. They were not unfocused at all - they were beaten by a better team and the score difference was 20 points. They tried to use their backline often enough - but their attacks were destroyed by two players basically Du Toit and De Allende. The ream that easily beat the AB's in the semi don't become unfocussed in the following week - the beating of the AB's should be an encouraging factor and not "unfocused" now discovered by you.

The English lost the tight-five forward battle - the loose forward battle and the backline battle. Two tries were scored by the Springboks in which forwards played roles as well.

They were outplayed and outcoached as well.

In your dreams Drinksbreak, Vaccine, Timestamp, Cooker, Peeper and Cheater. A few times among many you have crashed and burned. And you do remember the hilarious incident when I had to tell you there was a second season of One Hundred Years of Solitude.

Humiliation upon humiliation.

As for fat…that’s you Cooker. Stupid….yes you, quantitatively illiterate with a limited vocabulary and education. Also cowardly and a loser.

And now showing early signs of mental impairment.

ROFL!

No professional team would ever be unfocused playing in a WC final - EVER

The English team thought they were going to win, were confident they were going to win. after beating the ABs who had easily beaten the Boks they thought they were home free. So much so, that when they lost they scorned their medals. Here’s a typical British press opinion:

“’There is no such thing as a one-sided final, even with New Zealand's dominance in over the last eight years. This game could turn on a red card, a controversial decision, a moment of magic or madness.

But having built so well during this tournament, staying injury free and with the extra intelligence, experience and, let's be honest, the sly element Jones brings to England, we should expect to see captain Owen Farrell lifting the William Webb Ellis Trophy.

England have proved they have absolutely everything in their arsenal and they still have more in the tank. They have the born winners in the likes of Farrell, George Ford and Jamie George and that is another factor in England's favour. They should win.”

‘These fools literally thought George Ford is a winner.

What the media wrote - as quoted by Mozart was media propaganda before the fact, The English team was totally outplayed by the Springboks in the final - both techically and skills wise. To quote an aerticle after claiming a nothing more than propaganda before te final and went sour during the RWC.

The AB's scored two tries against the Sprigboks one of which was a player thta rans tright through a tackle miseed b Mostert and for the rest of the torunament never started in any crucial match in the series, The other try was caused by a defensive error from Mapimpi, In the rest of the tinament only 2 tries by opposing teams were scored - one by Canada and one by Wales,

The Springboks scored many tries - mostly by backline players in attacking play by backline players, Mozart went ballistic on the issue of backline play where he claimed that backline attacks were absent in the case of the Springboks. In 2014 and 2015 the Springboks largely according to Mozart playing "traditional Springbok rugby" - which contained in the main zero real backline attacks and rather entail kicking the shit outt of the ball on a continuous basis, So Mozart claimed in 2019 and ever subsequently played the 2015 style of rugby Mozart praised and he refused to see any differences in the playing style since 2015 used by Erasmus since 2018.

Even the AB commentators after the final stated that if they were in the final the Springoks would have beaten the AB's in the final - but Mozart claimed the exact opposite, Since Erasmus was appointed he went on the attack against Erasmus claiming that SARU made a misttake by the appointment of Erasmus and that SARU should rather have retained Coetzee in that position. Since then - whatever happen in Springbok rugby was maligned and distorted by Mozart continuously,

From the start Mozart claimed White should have been appointed by SARU - something that was never on the cards at all, The saying "one bitten - twice shy" was even worse as in White case the saying was "twice bitten - thrice shy" applied in the case of White,

Since 2018 the refrain has always be repeated by Mozart - Erasmus contribution to wins by the Springboks happened despite Erasmus as coach, The position has been as farcical as only Mozart could believe, So in this case he came up with strings of BS and all suggesting things like the English team lost "focus" in the 2019 WC final. Mozart has had a tendency to lie what actually happen in tests and his version were at best farcical and very funy - because he once claimed he was the best performance evaluator in the world. In many cases his evaluation was so far away from the truth that it could ony be described as BS. In the 2019 he even claimed there was a try-scoring opportunity that was nothing of the sort and in fact dreamed up BS.

The :unfocused stroy is a typical Mozart invention that focussed on the ridiculous and can only be regarded as BS supreme. In the Wales semi the Springboks kicked too many balls and in training before he start of the same impression happened in the pre-matched training. So Jones beleived he knew what was coming and he prepared the English team accordingly. The fact it did not happen was totally different from what actually happened in the final. Anybody who was objective would have been able to identify the difference of playing style in the final was totally different from what Jones and the English team expected to happen and whcich Mozart hmself failed to see.

So the English lost the tight 5 battle and also the loosie forwards and the backline as well. The defense was so strong that at one stage the English commentato said " but there is no way through" just before the scoing of the Kolbe try. The same commentator said the defense of De Allende and Du Toit never allowed the English team getting over the advantage line. But Mozart missed the fact as to be expected from him both De Allende and Du Toit are failures that should never have been in the team.

The problem is that whatsoever Mozart comes up to justify is in fact BS and totally removed from reality,

. .

Mozart, Mozart, Mozart……Saaiman’s cup runneth over.

LOL

Bullshit