SARrugby.com

 Just have to ask the SA a few questions. Peter de villers was the coach who " seemed" to enforce POWER PLAY which could of contributed to the stifled back play and attacking rugby.

with Meyer firmly the new head coach and seen what the young players can do and more importantly the limitations of the senior players. Some questions have been raised about putting some senior players out not so much threw lack of quality but to install a new culture and skill into Springbok rugby. Such as morne Steyn, jean de villers, pienar, kirchnar, served country well but SA rugby won't develop new skills and culture. And have been playing under strick guide lines for the past 8 years. And the fact is no matter how hard they try they simply won't require the skills necessary to score trys.

there are youngsters who have not been influenced by stifling game plans and rigidly structured patterns of play which debilitates hunger for attacking flair. Habana is looking for work all over the field, pieterson is in his prime. Goosen has the vision to potentially be great fly half. Meyer should make it has goal and resposibility to mold these young players not only for the future but a new culture and mindset of how South Africa will play the game.

mmmm...yes i was trying to compare new boks to say NZ new comers, like Aaron Smith, Romano,Retallick, and Cruden who was thrown on to cover Carter,  he was under the worst pressure you could think of...you know just claim AB the RWC thanks, no pressure bro. Savea 5 test caps, 30 test points. I dont know if its that NZ newcomers are better Quality but they have a far better advantage threw the team creating more opportunities.

 SA rugby is firing on 3 cylinders for various reasons.  Provincialism ahead of National.  Non-rugby people in management positions.  Cadre deployment. Playing injured or non-match fit players.  No decent trials and a panel of experts who select the BEST team.  Persisting with the selection of playeers on their historical achievements rather than their current form and contribution.  Too much high-level rugby to turn a profit rather than for the sake of the sport.  Too many chiefs and not enough indians.

papamoa

As a student of history - also in sport - it is an established fact that sports performance tend to go through cycles.   You get to a stage where any sports team goes to the top and stays there for a while and performances subsequently decline and the team is lower rated than it used to be.

Take for instance the example of the Australian cricket team.   For many years in the late 1990's and early 2000 's Australia was unquestinably the top cricket team in the world.   Then the players that took and kept them at the top started to leave the fame and their ratings in world cricket went down.

Now let get to rugby.   The same happens in rugby and has been in evidence in rugby over the past two decades.   In the main the constant winning of world cups by different teams are typical examples that the same thing happens in rugby.   Teams build up top outfits and then try and retain them for the next WC.   Never really successful at all.

In the case of the Springboks the cycles are often influenced by issue that basically have nothing to do with the game and is often reflected in issues of another nature.  However, it is emphasized by our rugby management - who in fact has a tendency to shoor themselves in the foot anyway.   That further illustrate the cycic impact I mentioned earlier.

At this stage the prolems relating to performance by the Springboks are evident.   A lot of players that came to the fore by 2004 and did have an impact on the 2007 WB win and performances up to 2009 left the scene towards the end of 2011   I always said that they in fact over-stayed their welcome.    One of th side-effects was that there was no real player renewal after the 2007 WC win and many people left SA rugby as a result of deficient future prospects - bearing in mind that rugby is in fact a profession with a rather short periof in which it can effectively be practised.

That brings me to the present team and what the position is in the wider context.   I think that the cycle I refer to are in fact in the lower area - but as happened in the past it is bound to go up.   I have written repeatedly about the age factor of players and the problems related to player renewal.   In South Africa player renewal was stagnant for years - and now the situation is in fact that the team has too many youngsters and inexperienced players.   The problem is not so much in forward play - even in the recent tests against the All Blacks the situation in fact was that the forwards gained more than their fair share of possession.  It is basically in backline play - where they were for instance comprehensively outplayed in the test last week.

Personally I am not partiicularly worried about that issue at all.   I think that next years Championship will show some improvement and the build-up will continue throug to 2015 and later.  What is evident is that the younger players at this stage of their career should not necessarily be compared - there is too much building up needed in their cases.       

sorry mike some idiots F###ked with our jersey im pissed.

history shows 4 years for  a coach same as nz, all but Henry see what he comes up with. Forwards are great Big but productive..., If they work it in with backline  backline has a lt of catching up but over time Im sure they will be cutting it up. The NH should be good prep for next CC build up backline centre attacking ability and work on there defence structures.